You have1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.
You have 1 free article left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content.

Lawyers Weekly - legal news for Australian lawyers

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo

Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA

Goodbye job applications, hello dream career
Seize control of your career and design the future you deserve with LW career

Turning targets into quotas may be necessary for equality at the bar

The bar is not currently attracting its fair share of the best and brightest lawyers, and thus a change in direction on the question of gender could be needed, according to a Sydney-based barrister.

user iconJerome Doraisamy 03 October 2018 Politics
targets, quotas, woman, lawyer, holding a cup
expand image

With an international focus on gender inequality, spurred on by the #MeToo movement, as well as high-level discussions of quotas, ‘fierce and provocative’ women in law are well placed to help drive change, Jane Needham SC said.

Speaking ahead of the Women in Law Breakfast at the upcoming Australian Bar Association annual conference in November – a session she will chair and which will feature guest speaker Julia Baird – Ms Needham argued that despite being historically and currently a male-dominated profession, the bar associations of Australia are particularly well-served by their women.

However, she noted, no state or territory bar association can boast “anything even nearing” gender equality.

“The main effort being made to effect change is the Law Council Equitable Briefing Policy, which seeks to ensure that women are considered for, and receive, briefs (both numerically and in value) proportionally to the number of women at the bar,” she mused.

“The first reporting period for the policy has shown encouraging briefing numbers, but since adoption of the Policy is voluntary, it is difficult to know what is happening outside those firms, floors and practitioners who choose to monitor their briefing behaviour, and to report.”

In light of this, it is perhaps more difficult to measure exactly how much change is being effected than otherwise may be, she surmised.

“Anecdotal evidence of women who do not perceive a gender pay gap is often raised as an answer to attempts to improve the diversity of briefing,” she said.

“We need to measure, and work on deficits where they are found, and if change means moving from targets to quotas, then perhaps we should consider that move.”

It goes without saying, Ms Needham continued, that with women making up approximately 60 per cent of graduate law students, and just over 50 per cent of solicitors, the bar is not attracting its share of the best and brightest lawyers.

“The women who do make it are often subjected to gender-based harassment and bullying, as we know from the Law Council National Attrition and Re-engagement Survey and the NSW Practising Certificate survey results in 2015,” she said.

“This causes a loss of talent, which can only diminish the quality of representation at the Bar.”

On the question of how individual men can take action, she said they must listen.

Few men who have really listened to women’s recounts of sexual harassment and bullying fail to be shocked, she posited.

“Once they have listened, they should act. Sometimes, all it takes is a short comment – such as ‘rape jokes are never funny’ or ‘that kind of conduct isn’t respectful’,” she said.

“The Harvey Weinstein revelations show us that people knew what he was doing – so much so that a joke was made about it in that most public of fora, the Oscars, but he clearly felt empowered by the lack of action by his peers.”

And while each professional body is working hard to overcome structural inequalities which has served as barriers to entry and disincentives to remain, there is clearly a long way to go, she concluded.

“We cannot rest on the fact that the two most senior judges in Australia are women; while that is historic, the fact remains that women are a significant minority,” she said.

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy

Jerome Doraisamy is the managing editor of Lawyers Weekly and HR Leader. He is also the author of The Wellness Doctrines book series, an admitted solicitor in New South Wales, and a board director of the Minds Count Foundation.

You can email Jerome at: jerome.doraisamy@momentummedia.com.au 

Comments (17)
  • Avatar
    As a female (albeit a failed barrister) I agree. Truly, all female lawyers should do is support and encourage the indispensable legal talent of male barristers. Females are generally too emotional and only want their jobs for the maternity pay. Actually all women, in ALL professions, only work for maternity pay. A woman's place is to have a child (RE The Handmaid's Tale, a riveting story and realistic depiction of a woman's desire to stay home and support the family). Women feel pressured by men into working, when they should be at home, making sandwiches (or anything that the male barrister husband has requested). Thank you, Male Barrister, for displaying a wealth of knowledge concerning the womanly struggle, I salute you ( R u single??
    6
    • Avatar
      Sadly, I have heard male lawyers express this view, in all earnestness, that women are “ just not suited” to advocacy. Love your work.
      0
  • Avatar
    Women (generally) are not very good advocates. Either too timid, or the other extreme - too bitchy. This explains their lack of success at the bar even with all the preferential treatment they receive like being about 50% more likely to take silk if they apply.
    -6
    • Avatar
      You are a barrister, you say? I'm afraid you're not making a good case here - your argument is far too emotive and illogical. Perhaps certain biased juries might be swayed by emotive language and made-up statistics - in which case you should stick with criminal advocacy - but where's your evidence? Could this possibly be an unfounded ad hominem attack? D+
      5
    • Avatar
      You are part of the problem. Maybe one day you will have daughters, that tends to make it clearer to you.
      0
  • Avatar
    All this emphasises the lack of transparency in the silk system. Some suggest that good women are missing out because of entrenched prejudice. Others will say that the number of women appointed is disproportionately high to the number of women applicants.

    How can you tell who is right? If the selection process was transparently and measurably objective and fair to all applicants, this lack of credibility would not exist.

    But the Bar Association has insisted on secret and arbitrary decision making - an Association supposedly dedicated to justice, that refuses to practice justice in its own house among its own members - all justified on the basis that it's just a "private club".

    It's high time this "private club" joke of an institution of "silk" was abolished. The truth is it is not an objective badge of excellence. It is just anticompetitive tosh. It's time the ACCC got on to it.

    David Smallbone
    0
  • Avatar
    4 out of the 19 of the SC appointments (announced today) were women. It's a sad day when so many fine women have been overlooked by purely on the basis of their gender. I have never felt more ashamed of my profession.
    0
    • Avatar
      Yes bad day for women at the NSW Bar today. There were some exceptional and inspiring male and female candidates. The whole internal selection by the NSW Bar Association needs to go its just not modern or transparent. You shouldn't get silk just because you volunteer at the Bar Association.
      ~ disillusioned Junior
      0
    • Avatar
      No to identity politics Monday, 08 October 2018
      Were they overlooked purely on the basis of their gender, or were they not good enough?
      -3
      • Avatar
        This year had some excellent candidates who were overlooked. It doesn’t seem to hurt if you know the Bar Council and work on 11 Wentworth. And no, I did not apply.
        1
    • Avatar
      More than 80 male applicants were also overlooked. How many of them would you describe as "fine"?
      0
      • Avatar
        There are plenty of men who apply year after year whom no one views as senior counsel material except themselves. There were a few who were very fine and it’s surprising they were overlooked, we seem to have returned to a “who you know” process now the boys are back in charge st Bar Council.
        5
    • Avatar
      Barrister not a silk Friday, 12 October 2018
      There us no evidence they errr overlooked due to gender? Not everyone who applies gets it, especially the first time they apply. That said, some great applicants of both genders were overlooked this year, for reasons which escape me. Being a member of s committee simply indicates you did more than just practise in your own interests.
      2
  • Avatar
    One thing I have always believed is to "never say never"
    0
  • Avatar
    Why do we need this silliness in Australia?

    Is not the examples we are seeing in America enough for the rest of the world to want something other than divisiveness and politicking over identity politics? It is endless and never ending.
    0
    • Avatar
      Equal opportunities for women is silly? Can we assume you are male? My graduating year, 1990, was the first to have equal numbers of men and women. We thought that in a decade or so it would all be equal. Most of the men are partners or barristers, most of the women are no longer in law. Read the NARS report to find out why.
      4
    • Avatar
      I used to agree. But the truth is that women are not getting their fair share at the trough even after a good 25 years of encouragement and cajoling by government and corporations. the law firms are making a better fist of it but the bar is hopeless. . And it has nothing to do with ability ; it has to do with a stupid attitude held mainly by other men!! Quotas at board level and for provision of briefs is the only way left
      4
Avatar
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!