The Young Fabians’ Women in Leadership project aims to explore and identify the barriers women face in obtaining positions of leadership across a range of industries. While there has been a focus on women’s representation in different sectors, especially those considered male-dominated, this series is primarily interested in the representation of women in the top levels of the workplace.
A few weeks ago, we launched the second instalment in this series, focusing on the challenges faced by women in the legal profession. Our panel, comprising four talented female barristers, spoke about their experiences at the bar within their own specialisms, which ranged from commercial and chancery law to international dispute, European Union and family law.
Research has shown us that the proportion of women reaching the top in law is disproportionate to the number who enter the profession in the first place. While there is reason to believe gender parity is in sight in terms of men and women qualifying with a law degree, the gender gap widens significantly in the higher ranks of the profession. The latest figures from the Bar Standards Board (2014) found that 1,404 men were QCs compared to just 215 women, which illustrates just how stark the gender contrast is at the bar. More recently, the Bar of Ireland Survey (2016) found that while the junior counsel comprised 58 per cent men and 42 per cent women, the senior counsel or inner bar was made up of just 16% women compared to the majority 84 per cent men. Even more alarming is that the survey found two thirds of women had experienced discrimination during their career, often in the form of sexual harassment or casual sexism.
Many suggestions have been put forward to explain the lack of gender parity at the legal bar. While some mirror those explored in our first event of the series, others are more specific to the nature of legal work. One of the crucial points that has been raised in the literature is the casual sexism that exists at the Bar. Similarly to women pursuing a political career, it has been remarked that female pupils often face criticism over being ‘too aggressive’ in court, when they are simply asserting their argument. Women are warned to be more mindful in how they challenge their adversary in court, as assertive female barristers can be perceived as ‘hysterical’. Furthermore, a preference for male counsel has been reported in some research due to the fact that it is considered ‘weak’ to be defended by a woman.
The number of female graduates does not match the proportion of female pupil barristers, indicating that women are under-represented specifically in the higher ranks of the legal profession. A research report written by one of our panellists, Charlotte Thomas, suggests that the existence of a ‘finals gap’, in which men are more likely to achieve first class degrees than female students, may contribute to the disassociation between female law graduates and female pupils as a first is often an important factor in the recruitment process. The report cites several reasons for the existence of this ‘finals gap’ and how it is linked with the gender gap amongst pupillage candidates; firmly dispelling the myth that women are ‘less academic’ than their male contemporaries.
The gender disparity within the higher levels of office in the legal profession is not isolated to barrister’s chambers. The ingrained culture and environment of legal practices have been identified as a key barrier to women securing partner positions. The Law Society published a comprehensive report in 2010 around the obstacles faced by female solicitors in the workplace. They identified five key areas that were reported to create barriers for women moving up in solicitor firms. Many of these can be applied to women in other industries too, although some may reflect the more traditional, conservative culture of law. An issue often raised when discussing women’s ambition and professional success, is that of the dual domestic burden and access to flexible working. Although this issue is not solely related to the legal profession, it is worth noting that many women face the critical decisions around family life as they are establishing themselves in their legal career, at which point flexible working schemes become invaluable. However, although many firms and chambers offer these, it has been noted that ‘leaving the office’ is not the same as ‘flexible working’ due to the fact that lawyers are expected to complete work from home, logging back into their work email at unsociable hours. Another point raised in the report was the culture and infrastructure of law firms, which are allegedly conservative and lack positive female role models. An important point worth considering is that even those women who make it to chambers are often put off and leave early on in their career before they can progress higher up in the professional hierarchy.
The challenges women face practising law and attempting to climb the career ladder would suggest the bar is being left behind by the modern world. So how does the legal profession catch up and how does it achieve gender parity with a culture that seems so adverse to change, whether that be conscious or subconscious? One of the key issues, understandably considering the statistics, is the lack of female role models occupying higher office who can provide inspiration, mentorship and guidance to the younger women who follow. Attempts have been made to tackle this through women’s networks in and between chambers. However, ensuring access to these will be crucial to providing a support network that women can utilise.
The proposal of quotas was a significant theme during the course of the evening, with panellists disagreeing on their place within the legal profession. Some might argue that quotas are needed to provide the spaces for women, equally as qualified as their male colleagues, that men are unwilling to give up. However, does the concept of quotas undermine the principle of women achieving their position through meritocratic means? On the one hand, it seems that quotas can lead to accusations of ‘she only got there because she’s a woman’ and can make the positions women hold tokenistic. Yet, on the other side of the argument, quotas provide an opportunity by breaking down the cultural barriers women face to allow them to prove what they can do. Whether quotas are the way forward or not, fundamentally getting more women to the Bar appears to be the only way of changing a culture that seems to limit women’s opportunity.
From breaking through that ‘finals gap’ and increasing the proportion of women in the pupillage recruitment process, to providing support networks and calling out sexism, the change begins with increasing the number of women at the bar who can support, inspire and lead the much-needed cultural shift, crucially throwing the doors wide open for the women of the next generation.
———————————
Ria Bernard is vice-chair of the Young Fabians. She tweets @RiaB_22
———————————