The bar's up

NSW bar more gender equal than its Yarraside counterpart ... Why is that so, when there are so many lovely sentiments about equality? ... VicBar actions on parental leave at odds with stated policy ... Gender correspondent Ginger Snatch reports 

Martha: we need you

LOTS of noble utterances have been issued about gender equality for people of the barristerial persuasion. 

VicBar president Fiona McLeod is the latest out of the blocks, with a pledge to increase the number of women applying for silk. 

The latest crop of newly minted silks from Yarraside saw only three women out of a batch of 20 make the cut.  

Of the 45 seeking election to the Vic bar council at the most recent poll, only six were women. 

Out of a council of 21, three women were elected.  

At the Sydney bar 'n' grill things are a bit better on the female representation front. 

In the last crop of silks, of the 26 appointed, 12 were women.  

In NSW, at the recent bar council elections there were 70 candidates, of which 17 were women. 

Nine women were elected to the council of 21. 

So, in theory, female leadership roles are stronger at the sensitive, gender-aware NSW bar than in Victoria, which has laboured long under the yoke of a dominant clique of hoary Irish males with hairy ears and nostrils. 

It must have struck VicBar prez McLeod as odd, hence her call about fostering more women silks.  

Just how this is done invariably is couched in vague terms. McLeod said: 

"I believe we need to do more ... which will no doubt involve working with solicitors and others." 

*   *   *

THE imbalance comes from structural and cultural conditions. 

The VicBar council has entrenched the dominance of older silks (15-years plus), which of itself creates an inherent bias against women because they are less likely in present circumstances to last more than 15 years. 

NSW did away with the requirement to vote for a minimum number of senior counsel, with the result that ageing silks are no longer in the majority at the wig 'n' gown club's inner sanctum. 

If you examine VicBar's annual report you'll discover there is a consolidated surplus for 2012 of $6.5 million, with $11 million in cash reserves and $87 million in net assets.   

Not bad ... in fact, it looks to be in better financial shape than the more swollen NSW bar, which has current net assets of $7.4 million, cash of $6.7 million and a net surplus of $241,165. 

See: NSW bar's 2012 annual report.  

So, you'd imagine that the Victorians would be able to afford a generous parental leave policy.  

Instead, the bar council tightened its chambers' rental subsidy. 

The scheme had been enthusiastically embraced, particularly by women seeking time-off for children, but wanting to come back to the bar. 

A subsidy cap was introduced in March last year and currently stands at $1,300 a month. This might seem generous, but not when you consider a windowless box in ODC will set you back $800 a month and anything half-decent (even if shared) is $3,000 a month. 

Women barristers might agitate to unlock the bar council's wealth so that it can be sent the way of those who need to take time off, but don't want to return to ply their trade from a hovel. 

The bar council doesn't need to work "with solicitors and others" to stretch out a hand to  female members. 

*   *   *

ONLY this week (Monday, Dec. 3) the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission released its findings on "Women in the Law".  

It surveyed the experiences of female lawyers in Victoria, in conjunction with the Law Institute. 

For some reason the survey did not extend to the bar, although Debbie Mortimer SC was a member of the "critical friends group". 

The findings were hardly surprising: 

"Women are exiting the legal profession because of systemic discrimination and cultural and structural factors." 

We told you it was cultural and structural. 

The various bars all have nice sounding equality and diversity policies. 

The VicBar policy aims to ...  

"foster a strategy of inclusion and equality ..." 

Yet, it squirrels its money and downgrades its parental leave arrangements - at odds with what it says it is doing.