No more getting your clerk to do it – BSB bids to improve barristers’ diversity reporting

Bar: more than a third of barristers are women, but only 13% of QCs

The Bar Standards Board (BSB) is set to introduce a series of measures to improve diversity reporting among barristers after the vast majority refused to answer many of the questions posed about their backgrounds.

Though the BSB has robust figures in relation to the gender, race and age of barristers, fewer than 15% disclosed information about any disabilities, their religion or belief, sexual orientation, and caring responsibilities – and that represented a marked increase since barristers were last asked in 2012.

The BSB’s most recent main board meeting was told that it is likely the low disclosure rate was caused by “the ability to delegate responsibility for completing the monitoring form to clerks or practice managers, coupled with issues barristers faced in locating the monitoring form and submitting it”.

Among various changes being introduced this year to improve completion rates are that barristers will no longer be able to delegate responsibility for filling in the form, it will be more prominent on the BSB’s Barrister Connect portal, and the regulator will increase efforts to explain the benefits of completing the form.

From the data it has, the BSB will shortly publish aggregated diversity data about the Bar in line with the requirements laid down by the Legal Services Board.

It shows that 37% of practising barristers are women, although the figure for QCs collapses to 13%. In relation to ethnicity, 89.8% are white and 10.2% black or minority ethnic (BME). However, while 13.6% of pupils are from a BME background, only 5.3% of QCs are.

The low response rates mean that the figures for the other characteristics surveyed are not strong enough to draw “reliable statistical conclusions”, the board was told.

The findings the BSB has showed that half of the practising Bar considers themselves Christian, with 39% claiming no religion; 3% are gay men, 2% bisexual and 1.1% gay women; and 56% of practising barristers attended a state school, compared to 44% who went to fee-paying schools, figures that are 61/39 among pupils.

Yesterday it emerged that 21% of law firms have failed to meet the deadline for making their diversity disclosures to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.


    Readers Comments

  • Of course, rather than being due to ‘delegation,’ it could be that people choose not to reveal things to the BSB because they regard it as an utterly incompetent organisation that does nothing other than provide serial sine-curist, ‘Baroness’ Deech, with another opportunity for strutting on the stage of public life without actually achieving anything useful.
    I simply do not trust it or her to keep my personal data safe which is why I don’t disclose anything other than my name and professional address.

  • David says:

    I don’t believe that delegation had anything to do with it. The fact is that barristers are not required to provide such personal information about themselves (the questions even asked if we were gay), and the large majority choose not to do so.

Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


Reshaping workplace culture in law firms

The legal industry is at a critical point as concerns about “toxic law firm culture” reach an all-time high. The profession often prioritises performance at the cost of their wellbeing.

Will solicitors finally be fans of transparency now?

Since the introduction of the SRA’s transparency rules in December 2018, I have been an advocate for law firms going further then the regulatory essentials.

A two-point plan to halve the size of the SRA

I have joked for many years that you could halve the size (and therefore cost) of the Solicitors Regulation Authority overnight by banning both client account and sole practitioners.

Loading animation