Legal regulators are not doing enough to open up the flexible pathways into a legal career that are needed to improve diversity in the sector, the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX) says. The comments were made in response to the Legal Services Board’s (LSB) consultation on its draft policy statement on encouraging a diverse legal profession.
In the consultation response, the membership body said it felt “such flexibility is often not in great evidence… and regulators need to display greater agility to respond to sector issues sooner if demand outstripping supply is to be meaningfully met.”
Regulators should be free to develop their own expectations, CILEX added, taking into account their own specialist knowledge and understanding of their regulated communities to effect change. Greater expectations and incentives could be introduced to encourage new pathways to entry and qualification, CILEX suggested.
CILEX president Sara Fowler said:
“Everyone recognises the importance of the legal sector representing the society it serves and making a legal career accessible to all. While measures such as data collection are important, we need to focus on practical improvements that use existing evidence and good practice to make real change.
“The expectation should be on regulators to consider how they can proactively open up new routes into the profession or make existing routes more flexible without compromising on standards. This is particularly important in areas of high unmet legal need where more practitioners are required to service demand.”
Describing the legal sector as “conservative”, the body warned it takes time to instigate the cultural changes to the legal workplace required. Many of the barriers to entry are “rooted in broader societal issues,” suggested CILEX, and raised concerns about the difficulties experienced by the UK arms of US law firms. Such difficulties should be dealt with “sensitively,” CILEX said, given the current US administration’s antipathy towards diversity and inclusion initiatives.
The LSB could also be more supportive of qualification initiatives across the profession, with CILEX critical of what is described as “little active support” for its own efforts to improve diversity in key areas of legal practice. In particular, the body said it felt its efforts to “open up judicial appointments to those members who met the required levels of qualification and competence” had been stifled. CILEX pointed to evidence of the equivalence of its members qualifications and competence when it came to criminal legal aid, which was met with little support – a “furrow” the membership “ploughed alone”.
Concluding, CILEX said it wants to see “consistent regulatory standards across all areas of the profession for authorised persons returning to the law or moving between sectors.”
Without it, the organisation warned, there is a danger of a “race to the bottom” which would see such practitioners “simply gravitate to the lowest achievable standard”, undermining consumer protection and public confidence.
