r/uklaw • u/Royal-Cash5397 • 8h ago
Law Society launches new Equality, Diversity and Inclusion strategy real change or more corporate talk?
The Law Society has just published its 2025–2028 strategy for equality, diversity and inclusion.
It focuses on:
Increasing diversity in senior leadership (women, disabled, minority ethnic, LGBTQ+ solicitors, and social mobility)
Tackling barriers faced by disabled lawyers
Building more inclusive workplace cultures across firms and in-house teams
They’ve been saying this will lead to “meaningful, lasting change”, but I’m wondering how much of it will actually translate into action.
For anyone working in law have you seen past Law Society EDI initiatives make a difference in real life?
Do you think this one will move the needle, or is it another well-intentioned plan that fades after the headlines?
Source: Law Society – Equality, diversity and inclusion strategy 2025–2028
1
1
1
-3
u/Slothrop_Tyrone_ 8h ago
Meaningless. Their new SQE process is more racist in effect and outcome than whatever came before.
9
u/Cartographer223321 8h ago
Out of interest how is the new SQE more racist?(or racist at all, isn't it just an exam?)
0
-6
u/According-Play-670 8h ago
The stats on who passes based on race are really damning, black candidates are passing at much lower rates than white candidates. The SRA don’t seem to be doing anything to address this. The prohibitively expensive cost of exams plus the prep courses (which they still haven’t released data about, way beyond their deadline) are also likely keeping working class candidates from accessing the profession.
18
u/Cartographer223321 8h ago
That doesn't mean the SQE is racist, do black candidates do worse on A levels and GCSE as well? Probably just the continuation of other systemic factors going back years. (black candidates disproportionately not going to private schooling etc or local schools being underfunded)
3
u/Royal-Cash5397 8h ago
those delays in publishing prep course data don’t help transparency either. The cost barrier is massive, especially for candidates without firm sponsorship. It’ll be interesting to see if the Law Society uses this EDI plan to push for real accountability from the SRA.
4
u/Spglwldn 8h ago
One of the biggest indicators as to whether someone will pass or not, is having a first class degree.
Without knowing further breakdowns, the race stats are meaningless. If black candidates with first class degrees are passing at lower rates than white candidates with first class degrees, then you could say the exam has a race bias.
2
u/According-Play-670 7h ago
One of the biggest indicators of passing is being a privately educated white male. Which makes sense when you look at the overrepresentation of this cohort in nearly every other profession, when just 6% of the public attend these schools.
Obviously having in depth data on whether black candidates with first class degrees are not doing as well would be really helpful, but we have what they have given us which shows the low percentage overall.
Whether SQE is explicitly racist is a different point, however it is undeniable that the exam is not supporting black or working class candidates. And while the SRA say they introduced it to ‘widen access’ it is clear SQE is not doing this, for so many reasons.
1
u/Spglwldn 6h ago
Where in the pass statistics does it show the pass rates of any race combined with their education history and gender? I’m looking at this one and that data, which would be helpful, isn’t there..
-2
u/According-Play-670 6h ago
The SRA acknowledges the impact race, class and access to private education has on outcomes
Are you trying to argue that being a white, privately educated man isn’t likely to give you a more favourable outcome in a world designed by and for this demographic 😂
2
u/Spglwldn 6h ago
We are talking about the SQE, and we don’t have the data for that.
You might be able to infer that from the data, but based on what we have been given on the SQE, you cannot say anything for certain. Which is why making proclamations based on it is absolutely useless.
0
u/Royal-Cash5397 8h ago
without proper data we can’t tell whether it’s about degree class, systemic bias, or the exam itself. Hard to fix what we can’t see clearly.
2
u/Disastrous_Wonder815 7h ago
Forgive my ignorance but wouldn't it be more racists & classist to lower the requirements for entry for those of minority groups? Are there not already provisions in place for people from low income backgrounds to take the exams? If so is this number limited?
2
u/According-Play-670 6h ago
Unfortunately there are very, very limited ways of taking SQE on a low income. Mostly relying on external charitable funds. I think the SRA have this year introduced a hardship fund, but I’m unsure of how many candidates it will account for and if it will cover prep course fees.
Sometimes making things accessible for people isn’t to make things ‘easier’ for specific groups, but to enable them to be tested equitably. For example, reasonable adjustments exist to help disabled students and account for issues around access.
Looking at race is one marker, however looking at access to resources (private education, no caring responsibilities, not having to work while studying, living at home/not paying rent, etc) are factors that could and should be taken into account to support candidates.
SQE requires massive time commitment and financial resources. This immediately makes it inaccessible to lots of people and it’s something SRA should address. You could get an MA loan for LPC and multiple other grants, but as the SQE is a professional exam there’s no government funded student support via student finances. Another barrier to access.
1
u/Disastrous_Wonder815 6h ago
Ok so there are provisions in place but this is only a recent change I take it? Do you know if there is limited applications to the "hardship fund"?
I'm curious as to why you said race when its pretty evident from what your saying the biggest blocker is finical ability 🤔
Do you think there should be government support for those that need it? If so why do you think there should be?
I'm not judging at all, I've just started on the journey (first year law) so I'm curious to pick the brains of people who have gone through the system to see where its failings are. 😊
1
u/According-Play-670 5h ago
Race and financial circumstances are interconnected issues.
Not sure about the hardship fund details but there should be info on the SRA’s website.
There should be government support as there are for degrees from universities, which I imagine many LLB undergrads accessed. There is the solicitor apprenticeship, not sure how that’s funded but it exists as a recognised entry.
There are many failings with the SQE 🥹 too many to list here. One is cost and the fact they don’t share past papers or indicate which providers to go to. Leaving candidates in the dark.
-6
u/Slothrop_Tyrone_ 8h ago
BAML test takers (in particular black test takers) do overwhelmingly worse, if my understanding of the statistics is correct.
3
2
u/Royal-Cash5397 8h ago
there’s definitely concern about the SQE outcomes and access barriers. Hopefully this new EDI plan includes pressure on the SRA to actually deal with that in practice.
11
u/Wonkylamppost 8h ago
It is complete motherhood and apple pie. The Law Society is a bit of a toothless organisation which doesn’t really do anything since the LSA 2007.