BARRIERS TO APPLICATION TO JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT 2013
In 2013 the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), in partnership with the Law Society (LS), CILEx and the Bar Council (BC), with support from the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) and Judicial Office (JO),commissioned Accent (a research company) to conduct a survey of the legal profession in order to identify potential barriers to application for judicial office and to update the findings from a comparable exercise conducted in 2008. A questionnaire was sent to lawyers eligible for judicial appointment and, based on 4,051 responses, the results were compiled in a report (the Report).
A working group was set up, comprising members of each of the professional bodies and the stakeholders who had commissioned the research, to analyse the results. The aim of the group was to construct an action plan as a form of conclusion and ‘next steps’ allowing all interested parties to work together to address the Report’s key findings.
Over a series of meetings, using the Report’s results, the working group identified the principal barriers to application for judicial appointment and formulated six key actions to be taken to overcome those barriers:
- More information on the judicial role
- More diverse judicial role-models
- More information on the judicial recruitment and selection process
- Improved judicial selection exercise programme
- Support by employers to encourage the take up of a judicial appointment
- Enhanced judicial training and opportunities
Each action area is underpinned by the relevant key statistics (taken from the final report – available for download from the JAC website:
The six key actions have been combined into a single integrated action plan. The action plan covers the ‘areas to target,’ solutions, and timescales for each action. Each action identifies those responsible for addressing the specific target area and references are made back to this report in each of the summary of key findings.
1. More information on the role
Summary of key findings and issues identified
- 35% of practitioners felt that they would be much more likely to apply for a judicial appointment if they had more information about judicial roles. 43% felt that this information would make them slightly more likely to consider a judicial application. (Figure 3 from the final report).
- 22% of all those responding to the survey indicated that the isolated nature of a judicial role was most unappealing to them. This was echoed by 21% of respondents who felt that the isolated nature of a judicial role makes it the second most unappealing aspect of a judicial post. (Figure 21).
- Factors which would make people much more likely to apply in future included the desire to work part-time or flexibly. 31% of practitioners felt that this option would make them much more likely to apply whilst a further 31% said that this option would make them slightly more likely to apply in future. (Figure 3).
- 26% of practitioners said that more information about the minimum entry requirement would make them much more likely to apply for a judicial appointment. A further 37% said that this information would make them slightly more likely to apply. (Figure 3 from the final report).
- Half of respondents (52%) who do not currently hold a judicial role or have not done so previously, agreed that ‘becoming a judge is something to consider at the end of your career’ (figure 15 from the final report). Chartered Legal Executives are significantly less likely to agree with this than solicitors and barristers. 13% agreed strongly whilst 39% agreed slightly.
- All of these factors were significantly more likely to influence BAME practitioners than white practitioners and female rather than male practitioners (page 14).
Key areas to target
- Judicial culture
- Isolated nature of the role
- Part-time working
- Minimum entry requirements
- Transferrable skills from being a lawyer to being a judge
- Pay & pension
- Work shadowing
How to address / Supported by / Timeframe
JAC lead
1.1 / Mythbusting – correcting incorrect perceptions by providing professions and judges with detail of myths and correct lines to take. / JO / 30 June 2014
1.2 / Promote case studies with positive stories to tell on the JAC website which may help them address their development needs. This may include work shadowing and reviewing the role-plays on the JAC website. / JO
Professions / 30 June 2014
1.3 / Work with analysts to evaluate the level of interest in Salaried Part-Time Working (SPTW) by monitoring any trends in the number of people applying for salaried part-time roles. / MOJ / 30 September 2014
MOJ/HMCTS lead
1.4 / Review vacancies and options for Salaried Part-Time Working (SPTW) prior to advertising, ensuring any options meet the needs of the business. Work with the JAC to ensure SPTW vacancies are advertised clearly, identifying possible working patterns available. / JAC / April 2014
Complete & under review
1.5 / Ensure updated selection exercise material, including the latest judicial pension information, is provided to the JAC in readiness for launch. / 31 December 2013
Complete & under review
JO & Judiciary lead
1.6 / Identify suitable candidates for case studies, provide articles/encourage coverage of judges from a wider range of roles and backgrounds including those working on a part-time basis. / JAC / Ongoing
1.7 / Finalise, implement and promote the judicial career map providing hyperlinks to partner organisations to increase visibility. / JAC
Professions
MOJ / 30 June 2014
1.8 / Continue to participate in outreach events. / Ongoing
1.9 / Continue to provide information about judicial roles directly and through the media to professions and other important groups and organisations. / 31 May 2014
1.10 / Complete an internal review of the judicial work shadowing scheme and report findings to the Diversity Forum in June 2014. / JAC
Professions / January 2014
Review complete
Professions lead
1.11 / All - To provide key speakers at events with standardised briefing ensuring accurate and clear messages and information are circulated. / JAC / 31 March 2014
Complete & under review
1.12 / LS- Use solicitor judges to highlight how solicitors can use their transferable skills to become a judge and what challenges they faced as part of the process. / 30 June 2014
2.More diverse role-models
Summary of key findings and issues identified
- All groups believe the system is biased against them. 40% of respondents agree strongly that this is the case. 35% agree slightly that it is more difficult for certain types of people to apply successfully for judicial office. 52% of BAME and 56% of disabled respondents agreed strongly that this is the case (Paragraphs 1.6 and 9 and Figure 65from the final report).
- More than two in five respondents overall (46%) would go so far as to say that there is prejudice within the judicial selection process. As shown in Figure 69, this comprises 14% of respondents who agree strongly and 32% of respondents who agree slightly that there is prejudice within the judicial selection process. (Paragraphs 1.6 and 9 and Figure 69from the final report).
- 26% of BAME practitioners felt strongly that there is prejudice within the judicial selection process; 30% of BAME practitioners agreed slightly that there is prejudice (Figure 69from the final report).
- Disabled people are twice as likely as those who are not disabled to feel that there is prejudice within the judicial selection process (28% compared with 14%) (Paragraph 9 and Figure 70from the final report).
- Partly driving the fear of failure is the perception of the type of people more likely to be successful and the factors believed to impact on success. While perceptions of the fairness of the process and that judges are selected on merit have improved, the belief that it is more difficult for certain types of people to apply successfully has increased (section 12from the final report).
- There isa continuing perception of the judiciary as a place where certain groups would not feel welcome; BAME anddisabled respondents felt this most keenly (Paragraph 12from the final report).
- Examples are needed of diverse role models and of less stereotypical appointments (Paragraph 12from the final report).
Key areas to target
- Case studies of successful judges
- More well informed speakers at events
- Role models (more diverse & availability)
How to address / Supported by / Timeframe
JAC lead
2.1 / Identify further judges from the case study contacts provided by JO who are willing to speak at events to discuss their career and how they personally found the process and their experiences within the judiciary. / JO / 30 June 2014
MOJ/HMCTS lead
2.2 / Support JO and JAC to identify opportunities for promoting more diverse role models, for instance encouraging new judicial appointees to speak publicly about their experience and support the development of case studies. / JO
JAC / 30 June 2014
2.3 / Ministers to encourage the use and promotion of the use of role models, through their regular engagement with the judiciary, including Diversity Community Relation Judges (DCRJ) and other stakeholders. / 31 Jan 2014
Complete & work ongoing
JO & Judiciary lead
2.4 / Identify role-models from all backgroundswith biographies for use with consent in case studies including on the JAC and Judiciary websites. / 31 August 2014
2.5 / Continue the existing work of the DCRJ outreach programme. / Ongoing
2.6 / Seek to publicise and communicate senior appointments from diverse backgrounds in appropriate publications particularly those read by the professions. / 31 Dec 2014
Professions lead
2.7 / ALL - Create standardised key messages briefings for profession led events. / JAC / 31 March 2014Complete & ongoing
2.8 / BC –Run events for barristers detailing how to complete an application form with focus on competencies and references. Use of role-models at such events to explain their experiences and who they used as a referee and why. / JAC
Judiciary / Throughout 2014
2.9 / CILEx – Produce guidance booklets for members with use of role-models case studies. / JAC / 30 September 2014
2.10 / LS - Produce guidance materials on particular aspects of the application process, e.g. references. / JAC / 30 June 2014
3. More information on the selection process
Summary of key findings and issues identified
- Only a small minority of respondents feel themselves to be very well informed about either the judicial role (5%) or selection process (3%) (Paragraph 1.5 and Paragraph 8 Headlinesfrom the final report).
- 44% or respondents indicated that they agree strongly with the proposition “I do not always know when roles are available”, whilst 29% of practitioners agreed slightly with the statement. This has not improved over time (Paragraph 1.5, Paragraph 8 Headlines, Paragraph 8.4 and Figure 44).
- 34% of respondents felt more information about the selection process would make them much more likely to apply. 43% of respondents felt more information about the selection process would make them more likely to apply (Paragraph 1.2, Paragraph 5 and Figure 3from the final report).
- There is a persistent misconception that a reference from a High Court Judge is needed to apply successfully for office. 29% of respondents believe this to be the case (Paragraph 1.5from the final report).
- 31% of respondents agreed strongly (12%) or agreed slightly (19%) with the proposition that too much weight is placed on references in the selection process. This figure rises to 24% for BAME practitioners (Paragraph 1.2, Paragraph 9.5 and Figure 73 from the final report).
- Compared with the 2008 survey, respondents were statistically significantly more likely to agree strongly that “too much weight is placed on references” (Paragraph 9.5 and Figure 73from the final report).
- 51% of solicitor respondents have never applied for judicial office because they do not think they would be appointed (Paragraph 5.2 and Figure 11from the final report).
- 55% of female respondents cite as the reason they have never applied for judicial office that they do not think they would be appointed (Paragraph 5.2 and Figure 11from the final report).
- Over half (52%) of those who have never applied for a judicial post because they do not think they would be appointed said this was because they do not have the right contacts. This equates to one in five (22%) of all respondents (Paragraph 5.2 and Figure 14 from the final report).
Key areas to target
- Prejudice and bias in the process
- Fairness of process
- Am I ready tests
- Use of references within the process
How to address / Supported by / Timeframe
JAC lead
3.1 / Introduce “am I ready tests” on the JAC website which aim to point candidates who obtained a “not suitable result” to links to areas which may help them such as work shadowing and reviewing the role-play. / 30 September 2014
3.2 / Work more closely with minority groups to better inform members and assist with removing the perception of prejudices and bias within the system. / Professions / 30 September 2014
3.3 / Consider simplifying the reference process and clarifying the use of references and who candidates should contact as suitable referees. / 30 September 2014
3.4 / Use of Occupational Psychologists to review our current processes and areas for improvement. / 30 September 2014
MOJ/HMCTS lead
3.5 / Continue engagement with schools, university students and the professions to emphasise independence of the selection process and importance of applying at the right time. / JAC / Ongoing
JO & Judiciary lead
3.6 / DCRJ and other judges to continue assisting at road shows, presentations and outreach work on judicial careers. / Ongoing
Professions lead
3.7 / All – Encourage prospective candidates to take part in dry-run testing and interviews to help with preparation. / JAC / 30 June 2014
3.8 / All – Promote the best use of references at events – It does not have to be a high court judge but someone who can talk about your work. Consider using role-models/speakers to pass on messages about their experiences. / 30 June 2014
3.9 / ALL – Promote events such as the UCL Understanding Judging: Roles, Skills and Challenges course. / 30 April 2014
4. Improved selection exercise programme
Summary of key findings and issues identified
- 44% of respondents agreed strongly with the proposition that they did not always know when roles are available; 29% felt slightly that they did not always know when roles were available (Figure 44 from the final report).
- 30% of respondents said that early notice of when vacancies will be advertised would make them much more likely to apply; 38% of respondents said that early notice would make them more likely to apply (Figure 3 from the final report).
- 34% of respondents reported that more information about the selection process would make them much more likely to apply while 43% of respondents reported that more information about the selection process would make them slightly more likely to apply (Figure 3 from the final report).
- 26% of respondents said that more information and greater clarity regarding entry requirements – judicialprofiles, job specifications and indications of the likelihood of success– wouldmake them more likely to apply (Appendix D Table2 from the final report).
- 21% of respondents said that better, wider targeted advertisements–morenotice of selections and competitions –wouldmake them more likely to apply (Appendix D Table 2 from the final report).
- 15% of respondents considered that more information regarding the selection process, including feedback on applications would make them more likely to apply (Appendix D Table2 from the final report).
Key areas to target
- Earlier notice of vacancies
- Improved advertising
- More regular exercises
How to address / Supported by / Timeframe
JAC lead
4.1 / Create new website and candidate application system. / All / September 2014
4.2 / Continue streamlining the end to end process of the judicial appointments process ensuring publication of the progress and improvements made. / MOJ
HMCTS
JO / April 2014- Complete and under review
MOJ/HMCTS lead
4.3 / In line with the recommendation in the Report of the Advisory Panel on Judicial Diversity in 2010, to publish a timetable of expected regular selection exercises to assist candidates in considering the most appropriate time to apply and plan their applications. / Complete and under review
JO & Judiciary lead
4.4 / Ensure notice of vacancies are swiftly passed on through the agreed methods e.g. JO intranet etc (It should be noted that early notice of some vacancies is dependent on judges giving early notice of retirement). / Ongoing
Professions lead
4.5 / BC- Publicise notice of vacancies through circulation of the JAC newsletter to chambers. / Ongoing
4.6 / BC- Create a judicial appointments section on the website and provide relevant links to the JAC website to keep information current. / 31 January 2014
Complete
4.7 / CILEx – Increase information on website about how Chartered Legal Executives can apply and to actively encourage members to apply through co-ordinated marketing and advertising providing links to the JAC site / 30 June 2014
Complete
4.8 / LS – Review first attempts to organise mentoring scheme and viability of expansion of the scheme. / 28 February 2014
Complete
5. Support from employers
Summary of key findings and issues identified
- One barrier to application is a lack of support from the employer; only 47% of respondents overall believe that their chambers, firm or employer would support them (25% believe this strongly whilst 22% believe this slightly) if they were to apply and this has worsened since 2008 (Paragraph 7 and Figure 28 from the final report).
- 34% of solicitors disagree with the proposition that their firm or employer would support them were they to apply for judicial office (19% disagree slightly whilst 15% disagree strongly) while 23% of solicitors indicated that they did not know whether or not they would receive support (Figure 28 from the final report).
- 24% of chartered legal executives disagree with the proposition that their firm or employer would support them were they to apply for judicial office while 29% of chartered legal executivessaid that they did not know if they would receive support(Figure 28 from the final report).
Key areas to target
- More encouragement from employers
- Supporting staff who highlight they are interested in a judicial career
How to address / Supported by / Timeframe
JAC lead
5.1 / Target specific firms to encourage them to support their employees if they are considering a judicial career. / April 2015
MOJ/HMCTS lead
5.2 / Ministerial engagement with law firms and CILEx employers to understand more about the barriers to entry and to promote the need for diversity and the importance of supporting their employees wishing to apply for judicial roles. / April 2014
Complete
Professions lead
5.3 / LS- Identify suitable Solicitor Judges to act as ambassadors to firms to highlight the benefits of judicial fee paid work to firms including how they make a success of their opportunity. / 30 June 2014
5.4 / BC – Extend the current Mentoring Scheme which encourages applications and preparation for judicial appointments to include the Employed Bar. / 30 June 2014
6. Improved training and training opportunities