header-logo header-logo

07 June 2012 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7517 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

Waging war

HLE blogger Sophie Earnshaw bemoans the abolition of the current minimum wage for trainee solicitors

"On 17 May 2012 the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) announced their decision to abolish the current minimum wage for trainee solicitors. From 1 August 2014, law firms will be able to pay trainee solicitors the national minimum hourly rate of £6.08. These changes to remuneration will cause additional barriers to access a career in law and will have a negative impact on the legal profession with a less diverse and equal workforce. It will essentially result in a damaging step back in an area that has traditionally been a popular career choice for the middle class. Despite growing opportunities and encouragement for people of all backgrounds to enter law, to a certain extent it continues to be an area of work for those from privilege largely due to the prestige, expense and deep seated networks that remain embedded in the profession.

Deciding to pursue a career in law should not be under-estimated. It is a significant investment of money and time, particularly for those who self-fund and study part-time. Not only is there the expense of studying a law degree or conversion, the fees for the legal practice course or the Bar professional training course are high. On completing studies, the average student will be leaving with a mountain of debt. Acquiring a training contract is no simple feat and some enter into low paid, and even unpaid, positions as paralegals, legal support and interns to get their foot in the door. To survive on this salary when the cost of living is continually rising, is barely achievable in the short-term let alone sustainable long-term, unless they are lucky enough to have financial backing from family to support them through their career.

The SRA states that during the decision-making process they had given ‘full consideration to the potential diversity issues highlighted by the consultation and equality impact assessment, but concluded that setting a minimum salary was not the best way to address these’. This is highly questionable. By removing the set minimum salary for trainees, they will be preventing people from lower socio-economic backgrounds pursuing a career in law…”

To continue reading go to: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

Issue: 7517 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll