Disability remains the most under-represented diversity strand in the legal profession, with fewer than 1 per cent of lawyers at the largest firms reporting having a disability of any kind.
Research for The Lawyer’s first-ever Diversity Audit has found that despite 19 per cent of the UK population and 16 per cent of working-age adults having a disability, around 1 per cent of individuals at the smallest firms regulated by the SRA report having a disability, with the proportion falling to just 0.7 per cent at the larger end of the scale.
Waqas Zaib, chairman of the Law Society’s Lawyers with Disabilities Division and disabilities ambassador at diversity group Aspiring Solicitors, said part of the reason for this is that people are still shying away from disclosing their status, particularly when it comes to invisible conditions such as depression or diabetes.
“The current membership of the Law Society’s Lawyers with Disabilities Division stands at close to 800 individuals, but this does not give an accurate reflection of the number of disabled individuals in the profession,” he said.
“The main reason we believe that membership to the division is low is that people do not want to disclose a disability. A lot of individuals believe that if their employer knew of their disability they would be treated less favourably or it may lead to a negative impact on their career.”
Firms are starting to address this issue by establishing support groups and networks, with CMS, Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF), Hogan Lovells and Reed Smith leading the way in this regard.
Reed Smith has poured resources into attracting disabled candidates at the junior end, creating a disability task force in 2012 specifically to attract disabled candidates to its vacation schemes.
Last year 65 disabled candidates applied for the firm’s summer vacation scheme while 60 applied for training contracts, with five offers made and accepted.
CMS, HSF and Hogan Lovells, meanwhile, have been focusing on normalising disability in the workplace, holding events with a series of high-profile speakers and running workshops aimed at giving disabled employees the confidence to be themselves at work.
However, Hogan Lovells diversity and wellbeing head Alison Unsted said there is still much work to be done, with a lack of partners willing to stand out as disability role models stopping more junior lawyers from disclosing their own statuses.
“Disability is very complex and one of the last strands of diversity where we still have a long way to go,” she said.
“When we originally tried to launch our disability network there wasn’t a huge take-up.
“Having a network of people who can come together and share experiences is different depending on their disability and we haven’t yet had a senior partner who has come forward to stand as a role model.”
While many in the profession do not believe people should have to disclose whether they have a disability or not, unless they do firms will not be able to offer appropriate support and stereotypes surrounding disabilities are likely to perpetuate.
“As a profession we still have a distance to go before we become fully inclusive, but we are headed down the right path,” said Zaib.
“We need to continue to challenge the notions that disclosing a disability will have negative implications, that expensive adjustments need to be made to employ someone with a disability or that disabled people can’t carry out work as well as their able-bodied colleagues.”
For more analysis read this week’s cover story and leader and to purchase the full report email richard.edwards@centaurmedia.com.
I agree with the comments in the above article however I think that there is also a lack of awareness in terms of what is a ‘disability’ in terms of the law. Many people will live with health conditions that would most likely meet the legal definition of ‘disability’ but would not self-define as being ‘disabled’ which could also lead to a lower level of disclosure.
Agreed. Hence: https://planetautismblog.wordpress.com/2015/02/01/aspergers-and-high-functioning-autism-a-disability-in-law/
It is quite right to highlight this issue. There is a perception that anyone who discloses a disability will not be assisted, despite this being a legal requirement. Firms need to be much more open that disabled employees will not be disadvantaged. There is a very significant discrepancy between the proportion of those with disabilities in the population at large as compared to those with disabilities in law firms, particularly at partner level, and this must be addressed.
I am a junior solicitor with dyslexia that was diagnosed at law school. Nothing at school or university ever tested me enough for it to be exposed. I have a very high IQ, but a very (very) low processing speed and also poor auditory memory. This mainly affects my speed and my ability to take notes during fast moving con calls.
I informed HR about my condition, but I don’t talk about it to the partners or make an excuse out of it. Most wouldn’t know.
I am a competent lawyer but the pressure on fees and workload is a source of greater anxiety for me than it would be for a “normal” lawyer. My attention to detail is excellent but I am definitely slower.
I don’t feel I would ever be comfortable enough to request to be treated any differently and so just have to do my best to try and meet the fee/quality targets of any other lawyer. For example I highly doubt any law firm would ever agree to a reduced hourly rate but for the fee earner to maintain the same salary, even if that would fix the problem.
Coming from New Zealand as an Autistic Spectrum Barrister and having stood for (NZ) Parliament on disability issues, I have been horrified at the attitude here within the general populous and the Profession. Do not admit disability as you will never get a job. I have been turned down constantly, even with pretty good credentials and litigation record, because I admit to being Aspie. As for our clients. It is worth considering Mens Rea when it comes to neurodiversity disability. No-one ever does, and I think that we are letting our clients down by not following through with due diligence in this area.
And no. I will not be ananymous on this post. I stand by my contentions here.
Simon I’m trying to contact you regarding a legal query. Have Tweeted you and tried your (clearly old) NZ email address. Please could you PM me via Twitter? Many thanks.
To Anonymous 19 Nov 11.48pm. You are quite right about the difficulties in getting a job if you say you are disabled. There are legal protections available of course but in practice it is virtually impossible to use them, especially if dealing with law firms. There will always be a reason not to offer a job and as long as it is plausible there is nothing that can be done even if the real reason was due to disability.
As a disabled partner I would not declare this to the LS etc for fear they would treat me/the firm even more harshly for any minor infringement. This may be unfair but I suspect I was not alone.
Everybody knows that “diversity” and/or “social inclusion” is simply a box ticking exercise for most firms anyway. It always makes me laugh bitterly when firms make such a song and dance about their social inclusion policies – while cutting and outsourcing as many administrative jobs (generally done by state school educated staff) as possible.