Tag Archive for 'equal pay'

On the naughty step

Published
by
NL
on 26 May 2008
in whatever
. 2 Comments

On the very crowded naughty step this week are the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Law Society and, umm, firms of solicitors in general.

Shahrokh Mireskrandari, senior partner of Dean and Dean, has launched a claim for £10 million against the SRA and the Law Society at an employment tribunal, alleging racial and religious discrimination, harassment and victimisation by pursuing ‘numerous’ complaints against the firm over the last 5 years, only one of which produced a, minor, adverse finding. He accuses the Society and SRA of acting

unjustifiably, oppressively, disproportionately and outside their powers.

Meanwhile the SRA has, under pressure, set up a working party to investigate why 62.8% of interventions by the SRA in 2006 were against black, asian or unknown ethnicity solicitors, while 37% were against white solicitors, who make up 78.6% of all solicitors. (I’m very curious about the remaining 0.2% of interventions.)

On the topic of unjustifiable conduct, the Law Society’s own equal pay review revealed the shocking results that the median income for ethnic minority solicitors was 20% less than that of white solicitors. Even once factors like grade, gender, firm size, region, post-qualification experience and hours worked were taken into account, the gap remained at 17%.

Women solicitors earned 32% less than male solicitors. Even after grade, firm size, PQE, hours worked, work breaks taken and area of law were taken into account, the gap remained 7.6%.

The figures are appalling, way beyond any ‘accidental’ disparities. If they are accurate, the figures are a pretty damning indictment of our ‘meritocratic’ profession.

That said, a closer look at the sample size might cause a small doubt over the reliability of the survey.

Researchers quizzed 1,201 solicitors, 9% of whom were BME solicitors and 43% were female – described as a representative sample after weighting. The overall response rate was 76% and 52% for the salary questions.

On my maths that means 109 BME solicitors, of whom 56.7 answered the salary question. That strikes me as small sample and one that is pretty easily distorted, even using a median. This doesn’t mean the findings are wrong though, not at all.

It also suggests a sample of 516.3 women solicitors of whom 268.5 answered the salary question, which ought to be more reliable.

Stop Equal Pay Claims - EOC

Published
by
NL
on 22 September 2007
in job
. 0 Comments

I was, to put it demotically, gobsmacked by the content of a ‘warning’ from the Equal Opportunities Commission that the Employment Tribunal system is creaking under the weight of claims brought by those naughty ‘no win no fee’ solicitors. When they have exhausted the public sector, says Chair Jenny Watson, they will turn on the private sector.

And now the truly jaw dropping part:

The majority of cases involve local authorities, but the commission says the private sector is just as vulnerable to claims.

It warns that “no win, no fee” lawyers will continue to fuel the number of women challenging employers. The commission suggests a new system in which employers must agree to check their pay system for discrimination to ensure it is fair.

In return they would get breathing space - a period of two to three years when they would not have to face any individual pay claims. The Commission’s chairwoman, Jenny Watson, said: “In return for accepting a legal obligation to check their pay systems are free from discrimination and taking robust steps to put their house in order should they find they have a problem, we think employers should have some breathing space from individual claims for a limited period. “This approach - what we’re calling a ‘protected period for transitional arrangements’ - is the kind of modern approach that’s needed.”

So, the system is collapsing under the weight of equal pay claims. This is not because the public and private sector persist in unlawful pay discrimination, it is because of the ravening hordes of no win no fee lawyers bringing cases. That these cases are merited and the claims largely successful is beside the point.

Rather than improve or enlarge the system so that unlawful pay discrimination can be adressed, the answer is to offer firms a moratorium on claims while they have a bit of a think about maybe not indulging in pay discrimination. The implicit threat being that if they don’t have a bit of think, the ravening hordes will be waiting, clawing at the door for when the moratorium period ends.

And this, astonishingly, from the Equal Opportunities Commission itself. The EOC’s website boasts the motto:

The Equal Opportunities Commission is working to eliminate sex discrimination in Britain today. If women and men had equal chances in life, things would be different. We’re working on it…

Apparently not by enforcing the law.

Whether this approach persists when the EOC vanishes into the Blob-like CEHR, we will have to wait and see.