Two sides of the same coin

Two stories recently in the press rather resonated with me. It was not so much the sense of irony in the nature of the stories, but rather the third, untold story, which very much deserved a voice.

The first story was that 1,370 people working for top law firms take home more than £1m every year: quite a salary. The second story was that trainees will no longer have the ability to insist on a minimum salary, but instead will be tied into the minimum wage of £6.31 per hour, which equates to a salary of just under £12,000 per annum.

So there it is, the top and the bottom of our profession: the fat cats doing rather well and the trainees struggling to survive.

But there is also the third unreported story: the story of the legal aid and high street lawyers.

All of whom have a similar degree to the fat cats, all of whom have passed the same professional examinations, but time has passed them by. Most earn a salary well below £75,000 a year; some, much less. But why?

I have been doing a mixture of property litigation for over 35 years. Taking cases to the Court of Appeal regularly and being blessed with changing the law in what was then known as the House of Lords and is now the Supreme Court.

I deal with vulnerable, trying clients. The work is complex and often of an emergency nature. Out-of-hours applications to judges in chambers at 9 o’clock at night can be very stressful.

I usually work a 50 to 60-hour week. In between the cases I am handling, I have to run the firm and deal with HR issues and that vast swathe of administration thrown up by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). It generally feels like I am actually doing two jobs, but only being paid (badly) for one. But that is not the issue.

The real point here is why should I, as a solicitor with an excellent degree from one of Britain’s best universities, have to struggle on a meagre wage, while our friends in the City and West End are making vast salaries? Why is there such a discrepancy? I do similarly challenging work and work long hours. Why then the difference?

Is it right that because I have chosen to work for the poor and under-privileged I should be penalised as a result? Where does that leave us for the future?

Surely any young lawyer worth their salt will run a mile from legal aid or high street practice in years to come, faced with such a ridiculous disparity in earnings. That will leave something of a vacuum for the client and those seeking help when their need is the most desperate.

One doubts indeed whether there will be firms to go to, advice to be had.

All very depressing and, if it were not for Cosmo panting at my feet, I might decide to rant on for longer. SJ

Russell Conway is senior partner at Oliver Fisher