The recent sex discrimination case against a city firm put inequality in the legal profession back in the public eye.

Rachel Rothwell asks whether things are changing fast enough

When the media splashed the news just before Christmas that two women solicitors had won a sex discrimination case against former City firm Sinclair Roche & Temperley, the size of their claims - with reports suggesting damages of 3 million, although this is thought to be mere speculation - had many lawyers' jaws hitting the floor (see [2004] Gazette, 8 January, 4).

But they may have been less surprised at the notion that here is sex discrimination in the profession.

The employment tribunal found that the women - who were junior partners - had been shunned for promotion to senior partners, denied the juicy referrals and earmarked for 'reclassification' to associates after a planned merger on the basis of gender - just another day in the office for many women in the profession.

The firm and the four partners named as responsible are appealing.

Law Society figures suggest that sex discrimination is widespread.

There are plenty of women in the profession, but they are mostly crowding the lower rungs of the ladder.

Only 24% of women solicitors are at partner level in England and Wales, compared to 52% of men - and that can no longer be explained away by saying that women are newer to the profession.

Of those solicitors with ten-19 years' post-qualification experience (PQE), 83% of men are partners, but only 57% of women are at that level.

The Law Society recently conducted extensive research into women who have left the profession in the past five years.

Of the 439 respondents, 44% said they were deterred from going back because of the profession's attitude to returning women.

Half thought their employers would have misgivings about their home responsibilities, and there would be a general lack of support.

Law Society chief executive Janet Paraskeva says: '[Our] findings suggest that many law firms will need to adopt much more flexible working practices if they wish to attract and retain talented women.'

Alison Parkinson, the Law Society Council member representing the Association of Women Solicitors (AWS), has no doubts about the obstacles women face in the profession.

She has encountered hundreds of women who believe they have suffered discrimination.

She says: 'At the AWS, I have met many women who have had large settlements [in discrimination cases against law firms] but who can't talk about it in public, because the firm agreed to settle and there is a gagging order attached.'

Ms Parkinson reckons much sexual discrimination is related to women becoming mothers - or firms assuming that they are about to do so.

She says: 'One woman told me that she had announced within her firm that she was getting engaged, and immediately found that she was no longer invited to client receptions.

'Another classic situation is where women go on maternity leave, and come back to find that they no longer have a desk and their clients have been taken away from them.

I hear a story like that every time I go to an event for women solicitors.

But people often don't feel free to talk about it in a mixed group.'

It's not always the men who are to blame, however.

Ms Parkinson says: 'Those who speak against promoting women are often the other women who have already made it - it's called the 'queen bee syndrome'.'

Solicitor Anna Kavanagh, who helped collate background information for Sin Heard and Sin Fellows' successful case against Sinclair Roche, left a City firm in 1998 and has since started a business dedicated to resolving work/life balance issues, Time4Balance.

She says: 'If you look at the drop-out rates for women in their 30s, 28% of them are dropping out of the profession altogether.

For men, the figure is 8%.

'It is very hard for women with a family to succeed in the law.

But in my experience women without a family do seem to succeed as well as the men.'

Ms Kavanagh has acted as an expert witness in six cases in the past eight months where law firms have allegedly denied women the opportunity to work flexibly.

'Even where women do win the right to work from home or part time, they have to fight their corner very hard to retain credibility,' she says.

Law firms will often cite the preferences of the client as a reason for refusing to consider different ways of working.

But in reality, clients are often far ahead of their lawyers when it comes to those issues.

Carol Williams, head of legal at Northern Foods and chairwoman of the Law Society's Commerce & Industry Group, says: 'Industry is far ahead of private practice in terms of recognising its responsibilities.

Private practice has been in its own little cocooned world - even now there are only a few women prepared to take on the firms [in discrimination cases], because they believe that once they have been tarred with that brush, they will never get another job [in the law].

'In industry, where there are the trade unions, people have been much more willing to push their rights forward.

It's not perfect in industry, but as an in-house lawyer in the manufacturing sector, there have been very few occasions when I have been treated as anything but a manager, regardless of sex.'

She adds: 'But I have had meetings in London [in the mid-1990s] with big City law firms where I have arrived with my male boss, and the lawyers have not even introduced themselves to me because they assumed I was a secretary.

I soon introduced myself.'

Given that women earn less than men in most spheres of work, it is no surprise that the same is true in the law.

But bringing a claim is no easy task.

Ms Kavanagh says: 'You almost always hear complaints about lack of equal pay and promotion, women not getting the same bonuses and pay rises as men.

But the Equal Pay Act [1970] is very hard to navigate and claims are hard to prove.

'All of my female friends who are lawyers feel they are not paid the same as the men.

I certainly wasn't being paid the same [when I worked in the City] - I knew that because we talked to each other.'

Some lawyers do compare salaries, but in many firms finding out what other lawyers are earning can constitute a sackable offence - a culture of secrecy which goes against women.

Transparency of pay scales and regular pay reviews to monitor equality are all too lacking in the legal sector, it is argued.

Where women do take matters to law, the vast majority of cases will settle, and often at the last minute.

In a common tactic, law firms will not make a realistic offer - with a vow of silence attached - until the final stages before a tribunal hearing.

The hope is that the complainant will have run out of money, energy or motivation long before then.

But all this may be about to change.

Sue Ashtiany, head of employment at City firm Nabarro Nathanson and recently reappointed as a commissioner at the Equal Opportunities Commission, says: 'High-profile cases such as the two brought against Sinclair Roche are helpful in two ways.

They encourage other women to come forward, because they can see that these women survived and won.

And they are a wake-up call to the firms - there is no reason to suppose that Sinclair Roche was somehow an anomaly in the legal profession.

'There has been a heightening of awareness, with women in the profession less prepared to accept the kind of thing that has gone on in the past.

And that is reflected by the fact that lawyers' firms are starting to take the issue more seriously.'

Law firms are slowly beginning to implement equal opportunities policies to guard against discrimination, and this in turn encourages women to bring claims when the policy is breached.

Ms Ashtiany says: 'The more open [a firm's culture] is, the more likely women are to put their heads above the parapet and speak out.

But that doesn't mean employers should avoid implementing these policies - you can't go backwards, the only way to resolve these issues is to move forward.'

Ms Kavanagh has also seen positive signs.

She says: 'I know of two City firms which are concerned at the number of women leaving the firm and are looking at ways of addressing the issue.'

The traditional love affair between law firms and long billable hours - which many women believe is at the root of much discrimination - may be coming to an end in some firms.

Ms Ashtiany says: 'Some firms are now recognising that part-time work should not be a bar to partnership.

But you still have firms out there who are requiring 110% commitment culture.

They need a step change in how they define commitment.'

But not all women are convinced that change is either imminent or inevitable.

Ms Parkinson says: 'I have been involved with these issues for 25 years, and I am still hearing the same stories.

Women need to make this into an issue which gets talked about more openly.

They should confide more in their male colleagues - many of them would be absolutely horrified about what is going on.'