Sackman sets out diversity rules for pupillage funding offer


Sackman: Targeted outreach

Chambers should use the ‘positive action’ provision in the Equality Act to increase representation in the profession if they take advantage of the government’s match-funding scheme for pupillages.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) last month pledged £1.5m for each of the next two years to help fund up to 100 additional pupillages annually in criminal law.

It means chambers that would have only taken on one pupil will have the backing to hire two.

The announcement said chambers receiving MoJ funding would also be expected to incorporate equal opportunity measures into their recruitment practices through targeted outreach and steps to increase representation in the profession.

Asked in Parliament by shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy what they would have to do, justice minister Sarah Sackman outlined three measures chambers would be expected to incorporate in their recruitment process.

First was targeted outreach – “activity to raise awareness of the pupillage opportunities amongst those from underrepresented groups, including lower socio-economic backgrounds”.

Examples of suitable targeted outreach activities included attending careers fairs or other events at universities with higher diversity representation, hosting open days/other events for under-represented groups; and mentoring aspiring barristers, including providing practice with applications and interview techniques.

Second, chambers had to adopt contextual recruitment, “additionally considering a candidate’s individual circumstances and experiences during the sifting process, such as their socio-economic background, caring responsibilities or experience of care”.

Third was the equal merit (or tie break) provision as provided by section 159 of the Equality Act 2010, known as positive action

Ms Sackman said: “This provision allows chambers to take a protected characteristic into consideration when deciding whom to recruit or promote where people having the protected characteristic are at a disadvantage or are under-represented in chambers.

“We expect chambers to apply this measure at the final stage of recruitment and only in circumstances where the candidates have been assessed as being as qualified as each other.”

Guidance from the Council of the Inns of Court, which manages the match-funding scheme, said that, as a matter of good practice, chambers should clearly inform applicants in the advert that they plan to apply the equal merit provision during the recruitment.

Back in 2020, the Bar Council issued a guide on complying with section 159.




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.

Blog


The AI governance gap in law firms and why it matters now

A third of law firms are already using AI tools with no formal policy in place to govern how AI gets used, what data goes into it, or who’s accountable when something goes wrong.


Information isn’t oversight – lessons from the PM Law review

The PM Law review’s real findings perhaps point to a failure mode applying to any organisation sitting on scattered risk information.


AI can do the work but it cannot inherit the lawyer’s duty

What happens when lawyers delegate cognitive work to AI but remain personally responsible for judgements they may no longer have independently reasoned through?


Loading animation