https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/sra-probes-firms-over-wellbeing-of-junior-staff/5105160.article (Dated 27th July 2020)
Last month, the SRA announced that it is going to be probing a number of firms over suspicions they are not protecting the welfare of their junior staff. The firms' culture and demands on staff will be actively scrutinised.
This appears to have come after a lot of criticism of the SRA over the handling of a number of prosecutions of solicitors, particularly junior solicitors, who are alleged to have acted dishonestly. The most high profile of these are the cases involving Claire Matthews and Sovani James who were struck off after saying they were afraid to admit to mistakes and were suffering from mental ill-health when they committed the misconduct that led to their striking off.
I'm happy this is happening. As someone who himself suffers from mental ill-health, the last thing I need to feel is that I am not supported by the very body that is meant to be regulating the profession. A profession staffed by talented individuals. Yet it has come at the expense of two other individuals who, reportedly as a result of mental ill-health compounded by poor workplace cultures and practices, have had their careers halted.
Just as a quick reminder:
Dishonesty is a cardinal sin for legal professionals. Principle 2 of the SRA Code of Conduct states that individuals must act "in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons." Basically, act in a way that doesn't bring the profession into disrepute. Lying or being untruthful or deceitful is a sure-fire way to land yourself in front of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) and the penalties can be hefty, up to and including a striking off!
Now let's explore the cases:
[1] Sovani James was prosecuted by the SDT for backdating letters and making misleading statements to her client. This wasn't an isolated incident or a "moment of madness", but instead was sustained over the course of 17 months and only discovered after she had left her firm.
The SDT found this to be more than sufficient to justify a strike-off. There were, however, exceptional circumstances. The root cause for this misconduct was a combination of firm culture in terms of the pressures placed on junior solicitors, and her mental ill-health that arose from these pressures combined with difficult personal circumstances. Put simply, a "toxic workplace". Instead, her sanction was a suspension and she was ordered to pay costs.
[2] Claire Matthews was prosecuted by the SDT for lying to her manager about leaving a briefcase containing sensitive documents about a client on a train. She did not report the loss for a week. She told her supervisor that the documents were at home, and then came clean 24 hours later saying that the documents were left on the train.
The SDT came to the conclusion that a striking off was the appropriate decision. The SDT stated that her job might not have been at risk had she reported the loss at once, but waiting a week to report the loss was too long.
It was also reported that she was drinking excessively in order to block out the event and, at her lowest point, resorted to drinking bleach in order to end her own life. Reportedly, she was afraid to admit the mistake, which is a clear sign of a toxic workplace.
Now I'm not here to criticise the decisions reached by the SDT as I'm in no position to. But you can see that a common theme here is that toxic workplaces contributed to poor mental health and the aforementioned misconducts. The fear of admitting mistakes and the pressures put on junior staff are clear signs that the firm culture was not good at all.
Both James and Matthews were recently qualified at the time of making these mistakes. As trainees, it is accepted that mistakes will be made during the learning process. But do we stop learning and growing and developing once we hit qualification? No we don't! The profession is constantly evolving and innovating, which means that lawyers must continue to learn, evolve and become better. There will always be more for us to learn.
Furthermore, lawyers in this day and age are expected to be able to do more with less and for less. This is an added pressure on junior solicitors who are typically the ones on the frontline and acting as "the faces of the firm".
But what do we mean by a toxic workplace, and what is it like to work in one?
There are a number of factors that make up a toxic workplace and not all of them have to be present for it to have a highly detrimental effect not only on productivity but on employee health and wellbeing.
We typically consider a workplace toxic if:
It is staffed by managers or other employees who are motivated by personal gain (power, status or fame);
Those staff use unethical, mean-spirited and sometimes illegal means to manipulate and annoy those around them;
The motives of those staff are to maintain or increase power, status or money, or to divert attention away from their professional misdeeds or shortfalls;
Those staff feel they have no duty towards the organisation or their colleagues in terms of ethics or professional conduct; and/or
Staff are distracted by gossip, drama, or feeling like they have to choose sides in any animosity
Signs a workplace is toxic can be:
The mood of the office is not good,
There is poor communication between peers or from supervisors,
Rumours are rife (ie, someone's getting dismissed, a restructure, redundancies etc)
The language from colleagues or managers is abusive,
A high turnover rate of staff,
People take credit for work they didn't do,
Colleagues refuse to pull their weight,
People play the blame game and won't hesitate to throw others under the bus,
You feel like you can't take a holiday or time off because it has been instilled in you that you must be "always on",
There are cliques that form in the office,
Nepotism is rife, ie people promote their friends or their "tribe" even if they are unqualified,
There is a culture of bullying, discrimination, sexual harassment etc,
The boss is ....... well, kinda a dick!
This leads to things we see in employees like:
Significant losses in productivity
Bullying and harassment at work whether that's physical, verbal, psychological, neglect, the list goes on,
Employees feeling like they can't speak up about gaps in knowledge, mistakes being made, extra training they need/want,
Anxiety,
Depression,
Burnout,
Affected sleeping patterns,
Affected eating patterns (over- or under-eating),
Turning to alcohol or drugs or other substances as a coping mechanism, which can lead to addiction,
Suicidal thoughts or behaviours
These things can cause serious changes in behaviour and mindset.
I've worked in what I would call, based on the above, toxic workplaces. I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt, it is pretty damn awful! I'll spare a lot of the gory details but here's a quick timeline of how I saw myself change in one particular role:
-- happy, excited to come into work, proud to be in the knowledge that I was doing well and had earned the respect of my colleagues
THEN
-- the promotion of a colleague, widely regarded as nepotism, who was then seen to be jealous, insecure, desperate for power and recognition, and taking their shortcomings out on me, including numerous false accusations
WHICH LED TO
-- a mental breakdown, time off work sick, therapy, plenty of emotional distress to deal with
AND AFTER ALL THAT
-- I couldn't go back to who I was because the old me had been beaten down and broken. The old me was dead. So I had to reinvent myself instead. Its just a shame that to begin with, the new me was scared, anxious, on edge, cynical, unable to trust anyone and constantly looking over my shoulder.
During my time working at those workplaces, I would wake up dreading going into work. The first words out of my mouth in the morning, knowing I had to go into a toxic workplace, were 4-letter expletives!
On the commute into work in the morning, I'd be going over in my head what ways I'm likely to be stepped on, walked over, put down, harassed, have false accusations about me thrown about, be spoken down to for asking questions, you name it.
Whilst there, I'd be clockwatching at every opportunity, counting down the minutes until I could go home
The best part of the day for me was the commute home, followed closely by the gym session I'd have straight after work to thrash out some of the stress, often by boxing or heavy lifting.
Working in environments like this can really mess with your state of mind. But can it make you snap, or do things that you normally wouldn't dream of doing?
Quite possibly! Anxiety, depression, bullying, harassment, these all leave lasting impressions on you mentally. It can result in pretty drastic changes in behaviour and mindset.
But are lawyers who commit misconduct such as the above under the difficult circumstances completely beyond redemption?
I've been asking myself that since learning of these cases.
Lawyers are regulated people and are therefore held to a much higher standard. We must be much more aware and focused on our behaviour and conduct at all times, not just at work. This is a very tiring ask. Not because we misbehave, but because we must be hyperalert to what we do in and out of the workplace since we are representing the profession in all aspects of our life. There's that feeling that we're constantly being monitored or judged on our behaviour moreso than others.
The SRA regulates with the public in mind first and foremost. The society we find ourselves in nowadays, where young aspiring professionals and newly qualified solicitors tend to be millennials and Gen Z'ers, is a lot more switched on to the desire to maintain good mental health, a good work-life balance, to be active on the community, and for work to have a purpose beyond that of a simple paycheck. Could it be argued that the public would see a striking off as a punishment for misconduct that was bought on by a toxic workplace as harsh?
[3] Reportedly, Sovani James moved on from that firm physically and mentally and, at the time of an article being written for the Law Society Gazette in 2018, had worked in another firm with no trouble at all, with a number of people happy to provide positive references, and a "self-professed determination to prove them right". Could it be argued that the misconduct was out of character? Perhaps. But 18 months is still a significantly long time, and much longer than what is typically required for misconduct to be a "moment of madness". Despite this, and following this article, it doesn't seem apparent that she will be a risk to the public or the profession moving forward.
[4] As for Claire Matthews, it is still too early to tell as an appeal has been lodged but yet to be heard. Since being struck off she has been working at an NHS 111 centre as opposed to at another firm, and has a team acting pro bono (meaning not for a fee) on her appeal. We'll have to see the result of said appeal. But for the time being, despite the Junior Lawyers Division writing to the SRA expressing their disappointment [5], not just as the outcome of the prosecution but the lack of protection afforded to Claire Matthews with regard to her health, she remains struck off.
I'm not going to challenge the notion that dishonesty is misconduct because I 100% agree. The act itself is guilty. To mislead a client is very poor conduct, regardless of the profession you are working in.
But I do believe that the mindset behind it adds to the level of misconduct, ie did the person intend to be dishonest or were they pushed to act in that way because that was how they were trained? Junior lawyers are vulnerable to bad working practices because of their status - they are learning, training, and look up to the more experienced lawyers and Partners for learning, leadership and guidance for how to progress as a professional. Behaviour is learned, we know this. So there is a clear duty of care owed to junior lawyers who are still learning and training, and that duty will then be owed to the next generation by those same people who were once junior lawyers who now find themselves in more senior positions, and so on and so forth. If a senior lawyer is misbehaving, that vulnerable junior lawyer will be learning by osmosis and believe it is ok.
Whilst it doesn't excuse the misconduct and the detriment caused to the clients, I do have some small sympathy for Sovani James and Claire Matthews. I believe that no one should ever be afraid to admit a mistake at work, somewhere where they are supposed to feel safe and supported to bring their whole selves. We spend at least 8 hours a day at work, quite often longer, so we deserve to come into a workplace where we feel safe and supported.
So whilst I am happy to hear that the SRA is at least going to do some probing of some suspect firms, we'll have to wait and see what happens next.
Stay safe and stay well! :)
P
Credit: Cover image photo by Joel Naren on Unsplash