104 / 244
GAZETTE
JULY-AUGUST
1979
win against the inevitable rising tide of paper. And even if
he succeeds, he certainly will not feel a boost in his morale
while interviewing clients in a dirty, pokey, dimly lit room
with just enough space for one dingy guest's chair.
Matters will not improve on the day when a family of five
call to execute a transfer in consideration of natural love
and affection.
I find it difficult to complain about salary levels be-
cause of the absence of any really accurate information
about them. In Dublin, the average starting salary for a
newly qualified Solicitor appears still to be in the region of
£2,500 to £3,000 per annum. Outside Dublin, there
seems to be a wider range. However, the base figure
appears to be £3,000 per annum but in some cases it may
be up to £4,500 per annum. The substantial difference
between Dublin and the rest of the country would seem
to be caused mainly by market forces. Dublin has always
lured a disproportionate number of Solicitors in relation
to the national population. Dublin City and county with
almost 30% of the population of the country has 45% of
the total number of Solicitors, the figure now being about
1,000. And yet younger Solicitors (even those coming
from the country) continue to flock to practice in the
Dublin area and here I am prepared to concede that
younger members are the over supply which depresses the
Dublin salary levels. What firm of Solicitors in Dublin will
take on a young Solicitor at £4,500 per annum when 20
more will settle for a little more than half that? The
contrary is of course true in small towns where diffi-
culties are frequently experienced in recruiting assistants,
principally, no doubt as a result of the fallacy that Dublin
and the larger urban centres jealously harbour all of the
worthwhile social life in the country and that Island-
bridge marks the beginning of obscurity and darkness.
Again the message to the younger profession is the same
as before —make for the smaller rural practice in whcih
you will get a very wide range of experience and, more
than likely, higher pay.
On the question of whether or not salaries are low,
three criteria may be applied. The first is simply whether
or not the young Solicitor brings in enough money in
costs to justify his wage. More senior practitioners, seem
to take a rather short term view of this issue. They fail to
regard the payment of a decent wage to an assistant as
an investment in the future, which, of course, it is, if it is
the object of the firm to avoid a situation in which
assistants are coming and going every six or nine months.
The second is whether newly qualified Solicitors earn
more than other newly qualified professionals. Again we
are faced with a shortage of accurate information. How-
ever, almost any comparison between the starting salaries
of Solicitors and Accountants will reveal that Solicitors
salaries fall considerably behind. It is likely that it is not
until a Solicitor is between three and five years qualified
that his slaary comes into line with those of other pro-
fessionals. The final criterion involves this question of
"gross" and "net" pay and incentives generally.
Naturally enough, many principals merely draw so much
money each week as will finance their normal cost of living
and do not bother to convert this weekly amount into an
annual salary. So, I feel, there is a general failure among
employers to appreciate that the £100 or £150 drawn
each week or drawings over a stated period averaging
such amounts constitute a very considerable salary
indeed. These same principles are unaware (out of
thoughtlessness more than anything else) that £3,000 per
annum after the appropriate deductions for Income Tax
and Social Welfare comes to less than £45 a week for a
single person. It is very difficult to justify wage packets of
this order for any considerable length of time given that
"take-home pay" for totally unskilled employment can
frequently stand at much higher levels. Finally, on the
question of salary, the profession seems to be lacking in
inventiveness when it comes to incentives and the proper
treatment of expenses. Few assistant Solicitors are able to
negotiate arrangements whereby they get a certain pro-
portion of the costs derived from business they themselves
attract to the office. Even more surprising is the fact that
in country areas where considerable expense may be
incurred in travelling to and from Courts, few assistants
seem to be recompensed on a mileage basis I think that
the whole area of justifiable expenses could be re-
examined with mutual advantage to both the assistant and
the firm.
I think we are all agreed now that our methods of
training intending Solicitors have in the past, been far
from satisfactory and that there have been at least two
major flaws. The first was that apprenticeship was seldom
served in a meaningful way owing to the fact that up to
1975 it was possible to serve only a nominal apprentice-
ship during the course of a university degree. The second
was that the Society's own courses of lectures in practical
subjects such as Conveyancing, Litigation and Probate
and Administration have proved to be inadequate for the
newly qualified Solicitor emerging on to the platform of
practice, the main inadequacy arising out of the teaching
methods rather than deficiencies on the part of the
lectures or materials disseminated. The result has been
that many newly qualified Solicitors have commenced
practice with only a little practical experience behind them
and without the benefit of having taken effective courses
in professional practice. Thankfully this picture has
changed with the introduction of the new criteria for
apprenticeship and the Society's new intensive legal
practice courses, and even the strongest of critics of other
aspects of the new system will unite in agreement with the
greatest of its advocates that the "workshop" and
"learning by doing" approach to professional legal train-
ing is far superior to methods previously used. Never-
theless, just as the fledgling Solicitor under the old system
has lacked self confidence and has asked questions of his
superiors so will his counterpart under the new system
and here a little soul searching is necessary. Can you, as
boss, honestly say that you are reasonably approachable
to a young assistant who might want an answer to a
problem which to you might seem insignificant? Quite
clearly, no one is expected to remain a model of patience
and understanding when an. enthusiastic assistant
interrupts an important consultation for the purposes of
obtaining your advice. However, having accepted that
learning the skills of any profession or trade is continually
an on going experience, would you say that your staff are
inhibited either by your attitude or manner, from asking
you a question about any aspect or practice? Maybe you
have forgotten your own lack of self confidence when
starting out ten, twenty or thirty years ago to such an
extent that you now expect your assistant to be an instant
genius in an age when law and procedures are con-
siderably more complex than when you were starting.
These matters may appear trivial but are important to the
106