The Times reports that Pinsent Masons is the first law firm to enter Stonewall’s Workplace Equality Index - meaning that it is one of the top 100 employers for gay people. I actually suspect that homophobic discrimination is fairly low in large law firms, and that Pinsents’ placing is more down to a joint initiative between HR & PR than a real representation of different quality of life working there. Money is king in these arenas, and the complete disregard shown for solicitors’ personal life doesn’t depend on who he or she chooses to spend it with. Certainly in my experience a firm will let you get away with any number of personal attributes (positive or otherwise) if you rack up enough hours every month. But similarly, law firms are not the sort of businesses that need to emphasise their diversity policies in order to attract diverse candidates - law has rapidly turned into a profession where women and ethnic and sexual minorities are represented in huge numbers. The lack of these people in senior positions and the judiciary is symptomatic of that rapidity set against the time needed to reach seniority, rather than any glass ceiling.
Search
Latest Posts
RSS- Annual Limits Increase details released
- Equality Bill will tackle Lewisham v Malcolm
- But I don’t want to sack him…
- Agency workers gain employment rights
- Tips and the Minimum Wage
- Sick pay and benefits shake-up
- Proposition 8 - banning gay marriage in California
- Age discrimination in redundancy selection - LIFO and length of service
- Severe disfigurements
- Flexible working turnaround?
Category List
- Absence (2)
- Compromise Agreements (2)
- Constructive Dismissal (3)
- Contracts of Employment (8)
- Disciplinary (10)
- Discrimination (43)
- Dispute Resolution regulations (3)
- Employment Tribunal (19)
- Family Friendly Rights (4)
- Garden Leave (2)
- Grievance (1)
- Health & Safety (3)
- Lawyers (11)
- Limitation Periods (2)
- National Minimum Wage (7)
- Podcasts (1)
- Rambling (25)
- Redundancy (3)
- Remedies (3)
- Retirement (3)
- Solicitors (10)
- Status (4)
- Trade Unions (2)
- TUPE (3)
- Unfair Dismissal (19)
- Usefully Employed (12)
- Working Time Regulations (5)
Links
Latest EAT Judgments
RSS- Bath Spa Experience (t/a Il Toco D'italia) v. Lamarina [2008] UKEAT 0144_08_2411 (24 November 2008)
- Mauritius Tourism Promotion Authority v. Min [2008] UKEAT 0185_08_2411 (24 November 2008)
- Eweida v British Airways Plc [2008] UKEAT 0123_08_2011 (20 November 2008)
- Blue Chip Trading Ltd v Helbawi [2008] UKEAT 0397_08_2011 (20 November 2008)
- E-Zec Medical Transport Service Ltd v.Gregory [2008] UKEAT 0192_08_1411 (14 November 2008)
- Tradition Securities & Futures SA & Anor v Times Newspapers Ltd & Ors [2008] UKEAT 1415_08_1011 (10 November 2008)
- City & County of Swansea v Honey [2008] UKEAT 0030_08_0711 (7 November 2008)
- Telindus Ltd v Brading [2008] UKEAT 0143_08_0711 (7 November 2008)
- Arnold & Ors v Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council [2008] UKEAT 0332_08_0611 (6 November 2008)
- Manchester Airport Plc v McCall [2008] UKEAT 0230_08_0511 (5 November 2008)

Usefully Employed - employment law blog by Usefully Employed is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.
Based on a work at blog.usefullyemployed.co.uk.







1 Responses to “Glass Ceiling”
Leave a Reply