“A girl should be two things: who and what she wants.” – Coco Chanel
We’ve been talking about gender equality in law for a long time. We celebrate record numbers of trainees identifying as female, 66% at the last count[1]. We track the proportion of women in partner promotion rounds. We point to flexible working policies and improved parental leave.
All of that matters, but behind it remains the reality that motherhood continues to influence long-term earning potential in the UK, including within the legal sector.
ONS data[2] shows that, across the wider labour market, five years after the birth of a first child, mothers’ monthly earnings are on average around 40 to 42 percent lower than before childbirth. That equates to roughly £65,000 in lost income over that period. Earnings do not simply rebound once a child starts school.
In law, the effect can be sharper, despite ongoing investment into equality and diversity initiatives across the profession.
Legal salary growth isn’t purely linear. The real acceleration happens at key points. Associate to Senior Associate to Counsel to Partner. The most significant financial upside sits at the senior end and getting there is closely linked to momentum. Cumulative revenue, client relationships, visibility and sustained performance over time.
Maintaining that momentum means hitting billable hours targets, staying close to clients, being available for those complex or headline deals. That intensity isn’t arbitrary but reflects client expectations and the commercial realities of leveraged professional services businesses. Continuity drives revenue, and revenue drives progression.
Where progression is so closely aligned with uninterrupted availability, even temporary reductions in pace can affect long-term earning acceleration. The OECD[3] has noted that career interruptions around childbirth slows women’s wage growth because of missed experience and interaction, including in highly skilled sectors.
Motherhood is not incompatible with a successful legal career, but the demands of each can intersect in a way that can influence timings without reflecting capability. Resultant delays in promotions and equity participation can compound over time, and delays can translate into six-figure lifetime earning differences.
For firms operating in an increasingly competitive lateral market, that’s not simply a social observation, but a talent issue. Over the course of working with lawyers throughout their careers, I’ve seen how personal and professional timelines overlap. Different stages in each bring different priorities, and progression decisions are often made within that wider context. At points where the demands of professional availability and personal commitments collide, some capable lawyers will quietly recalibrate. Some will move. Some will decide that reaching the top of the pyramid isn’t, for them, worth the climb.
That has implications for retention and long-term leadership pipelines.
“No country can ever truly flourish if it stifles the potential of its women and deprives itself of the contributions of half its citizens.” – Michelle Obama
It’s also not unusual in law for people to meet their life partner at work, bringing two demanding careers, two sets of billing targets, and two progression timelines into one household. While Shared Parental Leave and enhanced contractual packages have broadened choices for dual-career families, client expectations and billing models remain unchanged for anyone in a caregiving role.
Often, decisions about scaling back are made based on household-level economics. If one salary is higher, it can make financial sense for the lower earner to reduce hours or adjust focus. Sector gender pay gap reports[4] illustrate how these rational choices can result in disproportionately slower progression for women, though the impact can affect anyone in a caregiving role.
It is important to note that this is disproportionately, but not exclusively, a women’s issue, and it does not only affect those in male/female partnerships. Many fathers, single parents and parents in any kind of family structure seek to play an active role in caregiving, without stepping off the partnership track. Some explore alternative firm platforms or in-house opportunities, while others may adjust their own ambitions to support their partner’s career.
“When I’m sometimes asked when will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court] and I say, ‘When there are nine,’ people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that.” – Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Most large firms now set targets for the proportion of women in partnership, typically sitting somewhere between 30 and 40 percent in the medium term. While that reflects genuine progress, women have outnumbered men among trainee solicitors since the early 1990s, highlighting that entry-level recruitment on its own can’t solve the issue if women aren’t reaching the senior end of the talent pool in sufficient numbers.
From a commercial perspective, this is about retention, and how to go about it.
Firms invest heavily in developing associates. When experienced lawyers plateau earlier than their capability suggests, move firms or in-house in search of sustainability, or opt out of senior leadership pathways, the impact isn’t only individual. It affects succession planning, client continuity and the depth of a firm’s future leadership squad.
If the objective is to win, retain and nurture and promote the strongest possible talent, there may be structural refinements to consider alongside policies and initiatives already in place. That doesn’t mean dismantling the system at the expense of standards or profitability but instead searching for ways to broaden how sustained contribution is defined and supported.
This could include, for example:
- Provision for reasonable fluctuations in focus for all (real life happens to everyone, not just parents), without compromising advancement.
- Recognition that long term contribution may not always follow a perfectly linear timeline.
- Clearly defined long term performance indicators for progression, reducing reliance on informal visibility.
- Active sponsorship for lawyers returning from parental leave, particularly in the years leading up to key promotion windows, to ensure they regain momentum and access opportunities.
- Considering alternative client ownership models that protect service levels without concentrating opportunity in a single, constantly available individual.
- Clear messaging, and buy-in to the principle, that flexible arrangements don’t equate to capped ambition.
The legal profession will always be demanding. High stakes work requires responsiveness and commitment. But thoughtful adjustments can reduce predictable points of friction between individuals’ personal and professional goals without compromising commercial performance.
International Women’s Day is an opportunity to reflect on equality. In legal practice, it is also an opportunity to think strategically about how career structures align with modern life, both professional and personal.
The firms that get it right will strengthen loyalty, protect their investment in talent and build more sustainable leadership pipelines. Harnessing the full potential of a talent pool isn’t just about equality – it’s good business.
[1] https://www.legal500.com/future-lawyers/survey-findings/
[2] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/healthandwellbeing/bulletins/theimpactofmotherhoodonmonthlyemployeeearningsandemploymentstatusengland/april2014todecember2022
[3] https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2022/11/same-skills-different-pay_af307ff8/a4d18506-en.pdf
[4] https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/features/touching-the-void/5119526.article
