by James Hand, School of Law, Portsmouth Business School, University of Portsmouth

The First 100 Years is an ambitious, dynamic and valuable  project that is seeking to build a digital museum recording the journey of women in law ahead of the 100^th anniversary of the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act 1919.  Alongside such things as an illuminative timeline, an intention to record 100 videos that tell the story of women in law and a number of events, the project, which is supported by the Law Society of England & Wales, the General Council of the Bar and CILEX among others, has recently published a page seeking to celebrate current women leaders in law.

The project juxtapose Law Society figures showing that more women than men qualify as solicitors (as indeed has been the case for more than twenty years (p.7)) with the project’s recent survey which found “only 10% of Heads of Chambers in the top 30 firms in the UK were women.”  Accordingly they are seeking to open “the important discussion of why there are so few women at the top in the legal sector” and have asked for suggestions as to who should be included in their list of “women leaders in law” which will “showcase the women who have risen to the top roles in their profession.” Currently, only senior and managing partners feature on the page (although reference is made to heads of chambers), ignoring the academic side of the profession.

In a short, open access piece in the latest issue of the Law Teacher, Steven Vaughan has set out some initial diversity figures regarding legal academia (drawn from HESA).  While the gender mix of law students in 2013/14 was approximately 60% female, legal academic staff were approximately 50:50 (although Russell Group universities were 45% female to 55% male).  Vaughan contrasts McGlynn’s 1997 survey[1] which showed 14% of law professors were women (against 8% in the university sector as whole then) with the 2013/14 HESA figures which show an increase to 30% (while the sector as whole has increased to around 22%) and comments that “while law schools are hardly beacons of professoriate equality, we appear to be doing better than a number of other departments.”  He also notes McGlynn’s survey of 75 UK Law Schools showed that “women comprised 22% of all law deans/heads of department/school, the figures being broadly similar for old and new universities.”  If we update those figures to this year, we can see that Law School leadership is much closer to gender balance than is the case in practice (or, indeed, in the professoriate).

A survey of 98 UK law school/department/area websites over the summer of 2016 shows 40 of the 98 as being led by women.  The situation is fluid (at least 5% are in the process of appointing new heads this summer) but parity is potentially in sight.  As in 1997, the figures are broadly the same for old and new universities (with the post-1992 universities at just under 40% and the older universities 1.2% higher at 40.4%).  Breaking the figures down into university groups does show greater variability but the figures are affected by the small numbers.  While University Alliance members are slightly above average at 41.2%, the Russell Group (as with the wider staff as noted above) are below average, with 34.8% being led by women (although there it would only take one more woman to become a head to bring the figures up to near average).

UK Law schools cannot rest on their laurels regarding gender diversity but are clearly more diverse than practice when it comes to leadership.  Indeed, were female leaders of law schools to be included in the list of legal leaders they could overwhelm it and some selection may be required (should those who run the project be minded to include them).  Nonetheless a list of “female leaders in law” without academic representation (such as the likes of Dame Hazel Genn) would seem to be incomplete.

[1] C McGlynn, “Women, Representation and the Legal Academy” (1999) 19 Legal Studies 68–92 at p 77.