Are you cut out for partnership?

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • This feature's intro does not lead to the conclusion that follows soon after. Which part of 'male, Oxbridge-educated, white' and 'eight or nine years qualified' justifies the conclusion that an 'average partner is... priviliged'? Oxford and Cambridge are not public schools.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Camford Oxbridge; the conclusion might not be supported, but are you genuinely saying its not accurate?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Here's a thought - female lawyers, being the smarter sex, realise that the life of being a partner is neither what they want nor what they need so they leave and have better lives as a result.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @ Camford Oxbridge
    The argument could be made that those with a more privileged education (e.g. at private school) are more likely to be at the standard required for Oxbridge.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Interesting article.
    I would have been interested to see a report comparing what it took to be a partner 15 years ago compared to now.
    For example in 1997 it seemed partnership was an option at 5-6 years qualified. Now it's 9 - 10 years.
    It really seems like that generation pulled the ladder up after themselves.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dont agree with quotas. Only become partners based on performance.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)