“A pit to put women in”: professionalism, work intensification, sexualisation and work–life balance in the legal profession in England and Wales

Abstract

Today, the rhetorical commitment to diversity and inclusion is almost universally espoused across the legal profession in England and Wales, and issues such as the position of women lawyers and alternative ways of working are recurring themes in the trade press. Yet statistical evidence clearly reveals a profession segmented by gender: its powerful and well remunerated positions remain overwhelmingly occupied by white men, and its working practices continue to require a professional identity unencumbered by responsibility for social reproduction. This paper draws on qualitative research to flesh out this picture and to reflect on some of the mechanisms which produce women's sub-professional status – which, it is argued, include the discourse of professionalism. Some themes identified by respondents – such as hyper-masculine work cultures in which women figure as backrooms technicians – are longstanding. Other themes concern either new developments or a deepening of trends already under way, which appear to be having a particularly adverse impact on women's working conditions. These trends include the intensification of work; the heightened significance of client care, leading to the development of ‘boundary spanning roles’ that generate even greater demands in terms of time and emotional labour, and the accentuation of misogyny and harassment consequent on the eclipse of traditional gentlemanly professionalism by a sexualised corporate culture. Under these conditions the possibility of the profession developing working conditions which offer work–life balance appears remote.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

[1] Clearly the way in which women's subordination plays out is patterned by class and ethnicity; for instance, the dramatic increase in socio-economic inequalities in the UK means that working class women have been disproportionately affected by the slippage in gender equality (Fawcett Society, 2013); it is nevertheless clear that women in general, as a category, remain disadvantaged (EHRC, 2011).

[2] On 25 September 2013 an independent disciplinary tribunal found that Craven's conduct in sending this email, concerning a female colleague, from a private email address to two colleagues to whom he was pupil master and to another colleague, was likely to bring the legal profession into disrepute; his punishment was a £1,500 fine. The case is interesting for a range of reasons, including the reference to a violent and misogynistic popular culture and the fact that the dispute occurred in a multi-disciplinary partnership where a male barrister's work was being managed by a female solicitor and where the dispute arose from re-structuring due to pressure on profits (Bar Standards Board, 2013).

[3] This displacement of traditional professionalism by an (ostensibly) meritocratic ideology has been described, with reference to City firms, as a move “from understandings about recruitment grounded in ‘family’ and ‘personal networks’ to those associated with certified educational merit” (Galanter & Roberts, 2008, p. 154).

[4] For instance, the EU and other international organisations, including the UN, adopted ‘Gender Mainstreaming’ with the aim of obliging policy makers to consider how legislation might impact women and men differently. Largely restricted to the public sector, its rationale was grounded in the moral case for equal opportunities rather than the business case (see Caracciolo di Torella & Masselot, 2010).

[5] This progressive narrative continues to be enunciated; see, for instance: Halley (2006).

[6] In the US this belief that in time women would naturally advance in accordance with their merit, has been termed the ‘no-problem problem’ (Rhode, 1991).

[7] The patterning by ethnicity and class is hard to decipher because of the complexity of these concepts which has been compounded by the claim that macro-level socio-economic changes have rendered them meaningless, ‘zombie categories’ (Beck, 1992); this theoretical position is reinforced by the rise of identity politics and echoed in claims that contemporary society is post-social category. Moreover, as Carrier notes, the increasingly complex classifications required to capture the contemporary multiplicity and fluidity of identity have undermined the validity of any synoptic analysis of social life (Carrier, 2012).

[8] Recent research conducted for the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission highlights the negative role which class plays in large firms’ evaluations of what constitutes talent and their recruitment and promotion practices (Ashley et al., 2015).

[9] Academic scholarship charting and reflecting on the transformation of the profession began over two decades ago, as the traditional professional paradigm began to erode in the face of the growing dominance of neoliberal discourses and policies (see, for instance, Glasser, 1990; Hanlon, 1998; Sommerlad, 1999). For a discussion of the escalation of the transformation, see Sommerlad et al. (2014).

[10] This erosion of the value rationality associated with classical professionalism is supported by research currently being conducted, which is finding that the majority of corporate lawyers struggle to articulate the public interest in what they do, and that ethics is a subconscious, secondary part of their practice (Vaughan, 2015).

[11] Magic Circle is the term for what are considered to be the five leading corporate law firms headquartered in London, measured by turnover, average profit per equity partner and revenue per lawyer for instance Clifford Chance.

[12] Silver Circle is the term for a group of corporate law firms headquartered in London which are just below Magic Circle firms in terms of turnover, average profits per equity partner (PEP) and revenue per lawyer Herbert Smith Freehills is an example.

[13] Hochschild (1983) describes emotional labour as work undertaken according to employer expectations, which entails a publicly visible facial and bodily display within the workplace.

[14] This is not to overlook the fact that both the assignment of women to low-grade work and sexual harassment have been consistent features of women lawyers’ experience (Rosenberg et al., 1993; Sommerlad & Sanderson, 1998; Sommerlad et al., 2013).