Women gain ground in Scottish law firms, but stark partnership pay gap persists

When gender pay gap reporting was introduced in 2017 the findings for the Scottish legal profession were stark: the median woman working in the sector was earning significantly less than the median man.

Given that partnership was still dominated by men – only 28% of partners were women at that time – while lower-paid support roles were a predominantly female preserve, the findings were unsurprising. But still, it painted a picture of a profession that had much work to do to right endemic workplace imbalances.

Fast-forward to 2026 and, while progress has been made, issues still exist around gender pay. Indeed, the Journal’s 2026 Employment & Salary Survey has found that a gender pay gap – which measures differences between median pay levels for men and women and is not the same thing as unequal pay – persists across the industry.

Though these gaps are the smallest, and in some cases have been marginally reversed, in more junior or entry-level roles, they remain significant at the senior end. For non-equity partners, for example, the industry-wide figure currently stands at 35%.

This can in part be explained by women working fewer hours than men. Indeed, 93% of males responding to the survey said they worked full time against 78% of females. This meant that, while exactly the same proportion of men and women (42%) reported working between 40 and 49 hours a week, fewer men worked between 30 and 39 than women (30% of male respondents compared with 40% of female respondents), while more men than women worked between 50 and 59 (19% versus 12%).

Men, who are known to be more aggressive pay negotiators when taking on a new role, have also tended to spend longer with the same employer than women, putting them in line for a higher number of pay rises while in an existing role. Indeed, though 23% of female respondents had been with their current employer for 10 years or more, the figure for men was five points higher at 28%. Similarly, while 42% of women had been in their job for five years or more, for men the figure was 49%.

That is not to say that progress has not been made. At the time the first industry-wide survey was carried out a number of firms made pledges they believed would see their individual pay gaps decrease. Pinsent Masons, for example, committed to investigate whether its bonus scheme unintentionally contributed to its gender bonus gap, while Shepherd and Wedderburn vowed to survey all colleagues to identify any barriers to progression.

At the former, the overall pay gap has fallen from 43% in 2018 to 26% this year, while women’s bonuses, which were 50% lower than men’s, are now lagging 20% behind. Similarly, Shepherd and Wedderburn’s median pay gap has fallen from 30% to 19% over the same time frame.

At Brodies the overall gender pay gap has narrowed from 19% when it published its first report in 2018 to 12% in 2026. That means that for every pound the median man in the firm earns, the median woman earns 88p. This is in part a reflection of the fact that women fill the lion’s share of the firm’s lowest-paid administrative roles at 77.5%, although there are also more women than men in the highest-paid roles in the firm (62%), suggesting women at the firm are more likely than men to work on a part-time basis.

Ashley McPartlin, head of inclusion and diversity at Brodies, says the firm has been able to reduce its gap by doing significant work on enabling women to access the highest-paying roles in the segment of the firm they are operating in.

“We have a structured annual promotion process for our legal services colleagues that is clearly communicated and transparent, and the promotion criteria are available for colleagues to access at any time,” she says.

“As part of our appraisal process colleagues are encouraged to share if they would like to be considered for promotion. This then allows colleagues to work with their manager to achieve this goal. In our most recent reporting period, women accounted for 76% of all promotions across the firm.”

At the top end, that has included putting programmes in place to ensure non-work and family commitments do not lead female lawyers to deviate from the partnership track.

“We’re committed to building a culture where fairness, inclusion and opportunity are central to how we work, and we’re making real, practical progress to reduce our gender pay gap,” McPartlin says.

“Over the past year we’ve strengthened the frameworks that support our colleagues, achieving Menopause Friendly accreditation, maintaining our place in the Working Families Top 30, continuing to develop our managers through our People Manager Fundamentals programme and taking proactive steps to prevent sexual harassment in line with the Worker Protection Act.

“Our gender equality network has partnered with our learning and development team to launch a mentoring programme, which saw 35 colleagues participate in the past 12 months, showing colleagues are keen to invest in their development and support one another’s progression. These developments reflect the priority we place on creating an environment where colleagues feel valued, supported and able to thrive.”

There has been less movement at Burness Paull, where the median pay gap has fallen from 27% in 2018 to 25% in 2026, although firm chair Peter Lawson says it is attempting to address that by taking part in initiatives such as the Pathways Pledge. Launched to address the deep-rooted gender imbalance in entrepreneurship in Scotland, the pledge encourages organisations to take action-focused, measurable steps that complement their existing diversity and inclusion efforts in a bid to drive measurable change.

“Our gender pay gap, as is the case across the legal industry, is driven by legacy structural factors,” Lawson says. “Culture, fair access to opportunity and progression are areas we are focusing on alongside pay, in line with the commitments we made when we became the first law firm to sign up to the Pathways Pledge.”

Despite the progress that has been made, firms are coming under increasing pressure on a number of fronts to find ways of increasing pay levels for all. Harper Macleod HR director Rona Cargill, who notes that her firm’s median pay gap has fallen from 24% in 2018 to just 9% this year, says that at the entry level the firm has no gap at all, but that the impact of US firms’ huge salary increases for newly qualified solicitors is skewing how firms in all areas of the market are calculating salaries for all their legal staff.

“I and my peers in other firms are very aware of what US firms are paying on NQ salaries, and everyone has had to raise their NQ rate [to remain competitive],” she says. “When you do that you have to raise rates all the way up, though, because if you don’t you have legal directors who are disgruntled because they think there’s not enough of a gap between what they’re earning and what NQs are.”

While the trickle-down effect puts pressure on all firms in terms of salaries, Lawson at Burness Paull says that benchmarking against rivals in the wider UK rather than just the Scottish market enables the firm to maintain a competitive edge when attracting talent.

“Scottish law firms are operating in an increasingly competitive market where pay continues to rise and long-term success depends as much on progression and culture as it does on salary,” he says.

“Our strategy is focused on providing the highest-quality advice and service in core commercial areas where our expertise and market knowledge enable us to deliver significant value for clients.

“That means we are often acting alongside and opposite UK firms, so we use UK (not just Scottish) benchmarking data to ensure our remuneration structures allow us to attract and retain the exceptional talent that is vital to our client offering. Alongside the lower cost of living in Scotland compared with London, this ensures we remain competitive.”