For a new deal

Despite being in the depths of recession and a huge reduction in the number of training contracts available, it still came as a surprise when the Solicitors Regulation Authority concluded in 2012 that it was no longer appropriate for a minimum salary to be imposed on employers.

Now, at a time when the country is freeing itself from economic crisis, the calls for a non-obligatory recommended minimum are at least well timed. For me, so many years ago, going into a firm which hadn't taken on trainees for a number of years, a recommended salary was at least helpful in the negotiation process, such as it was.

Fortunately, the vast majority of firms and organisations employing trainee solicitors will have scant regard for whatever recommendation there may be and pay salaries competitive with the best of the graduate recruitment schemes available. If you want the best, you expect to pay for it.

The legal profession is still regarded as an aspirational job (with matching lifestyle). We all know the reality can be very different, but in the main, winning a training contract and becoming a solicitor is an achievement that comes after a lot of hard work.

Law firms rely on this high expectation so as to justify their charges, which remain high in most sectors. Such high fees are, in part, excused by years of training and reflect the experience of the fee earner and the salary they expect to be paid. It may be a circular argument, but firms (and, indeed, profit-sensitive partners) will embrace opportunities to reduce overheads wherever it is possible. That's just good business sense. At £6.31 per hour (the current minimum wage for workers over the age of 21) there may be an argument that some trainees would be financially better off on this model. It is well known that trainee solicitors in some firms frequently work hours far in excess of the 'normal' nine to five. But without certainty of a secure income, after what might be years of training and considerable debt, a job that offers only minimum wage rates is not so appealing.

There will always be a few who are prepared (and able) to work for free - anything to secure the ever-elusive training contract. And this is the crux of the current argument. Only those who can afford the luxury of a low paid job, no matter how passionate they may be about it, will be able to pursue their aspirations.

But the JLD argues that without a benchmark salary, the diversity of junior lawyers accessing the profession will take a hit. For years, the Law Society has been actively addressing this sensitive issue and attempting to forge a society of members which is more reflective of the clients it serves.

There is still a long way to go and anything that supports this initiative should be encouraged. That includes a minimum salary, even a recommended one.

Kevin Poulter, Editor at large

@SJ_Weekly #SJPOULTER

editorial@solicitorsjournal.co.uk