Report comment

This article is predicated on the assumption that the "gender pay gap" is something negative. Presumably its authors believe that most employers are rampant sexists and will pay a male lawyer more than a female lawyer for doing exactly the same thing, because they hate women. It takes no account of different working practices, or the fact that women tend to have a pretty significant life event called "having a child" which necessarily means you have less time for work (especially partnership).

What's the ultimate goal of such articles and drives? To have equality of outcome? To ensure every employee is paid exactly the same? If so, why stop at sex? Why not ensure every ethnicity is paid the same? Every sexuality? Every sexual proclivity? Will we hear about the foot fetishist's pay gap soon? If not, why not?

Equality of outcome is communism by another name, and whilst our government is filled with ex-Marxists (on both sides), I would have hoped we lawyers would have been smarter. In any small organisation, women will be appreciated for what they can bring to the firm. In any large organisation, even if the former doesn't apply, there'll be sufficient personnel procedures to ensure any individual incidents of sexism would be dealt with. And if they're not, pick another firm; there are plenty out there who will appreciate you.