Linklaters reports latest gender and ethnicity pay gaps

By on

Magic circle player reveals largely unchanged results

Linklaters has become the second magic circle player to go public with its 2020 pay gap figures, revealing results largely unchanged compared to the previous year.

The magic circle firm’s UK partner inclusive gender results stand at 62.9% (mean) and 39.5% (median) respectively. Links’ results for 2019 were 62.6% and 39.1%. The firm’s mean gender pay gap for staff, excluding partners, increased slightly from 19.5% to 20.7%.

Elsewhere, the firm’s ethnicity pay gap, including partners, sits at 34.6% — up from a 2019 result of 32.9%. The ethnicity gap for staff bonuses, excluding partners, shrank from 41.9% to 29.9%.

The 2021 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

“During times of global uncertainty and heightened anxiety, the social and business imperatives of diversity and inclusion are palpable,” the firm said in statement. “We are committed to providing fair and competitive reward to all our people and are confident that we pay our people fairly for equivalent roles, irrespective of gender or ethnicity.”

Links isn’t the first MC player to go public with its 2020 figures. Legal Cheek reported in October that Allen & Overy had made slight improvements in both its gender and ethnicity pay gap, revealing partner inclusive mean gender and ethnicity pay gaps of 59.9% and 22.4% respectively.

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



Complete waste of time


Ok boomer

Not it’s not, you cynical boomer. It’s an important step.


Tired boomer

Ok zoomer



Why is something that proves nothing remotely important? Why is ageism ok for you? Why are you such a witless basic cliché?

Rather that you think this an “important step” proves the point made many times that this nonsense only inflates a misplaced sense of discrimination and a perceived but ill-founded need to remedy a “wrong” that these data do not establish.



Can we have a nonsense report comparing people who do different jobs while not adjusting for the effects of those leaving the work force for child care or other reasons? Can we also have one that reflects socioeconomic factors but which does not collate or adjust for those factors so as to render the data pointless and instead misleadingly looks at the data from an irrelevant race based perspective? Oh, I see both such data sets have been published by Linklaters today. Thanks, I have run out of loo roll so the timing is perfect.


Someone who can actually interpret statistics

Ethnic minorities are substantially younger than the general population, therefore less seniority, therefore lower pay.

Not every inequality of outcome is due to “structural racism” and disingenuously claiming that it is, is simply increasing division in society.



Boris boasts about wanting to cut red tape but burdens UK Plc with the costs of this useless crap.



Maybe, as a man, I should tell my wife that I intend to stay at home, to care for our family, and that she must go back to work to redress the gender imbalance and, perhaps more importantly, to fund the lifestyle that we enjoy as a family. However I’m not that brave and I know the response I’d receive!

People seem to be mistaking being able to do anything you want for being able to do EVERYTHING that you want. Life is in general a compromise. I want to be rich and retired at 50, but I also want to enjoy nice meals out, the theatre and fine wines, and own my own lavish house, which all happen to be expensive. It’s just not fair that I can’t have it all!!


Useful article

This Law Society Gazette article provides useful background on the disparity between men and women in the profession. Not the article itself, mind you, rather the comments beneath it:


Real World 2021

Yes, leaving the profession out of choice because you married a man who makes a decent wedge should be criminalised. That sort of horrific action causes so much of the “gender pay gap”.


Some background information

The gender pay gap is nonsense. It is a made-up figure for those craving victimhood. Annabel Denham wrote this concise summary of why it is simply contrived rubbish:

** Feminists mislead women with talk of the gender pay gap **
Annabel Denham, 30 November 2020, The Times,

Amid the biggest health and economic crisis Britain has faced in peacetime, the Fawcett Society saw fit on November 20 to celebrate the highlight of its year: Equal Pay Day. As usual, it was accompanied by hysterical cries that women were “working for free until the end of December!”

It has been illegal since the 1970 Equal Pay Act to pay men and women different wages for the same work. Fawcett’s assertion is based on cherry-picking data that paints a misleading picture and feeds a tired narrative of sexism in the workplace.

What’s more, it uses mean rather than median data (in contrast with the Office for National Statistics), which enables it to include a small number of exceptionally high salaries, distorting the true picture. And it fails to take into account key differentials: the type of job, educational qualifications, work experience, or less tangible qualities that lead an organisation to rate one employee above another.

The real problem with the determination of groups like the Fawcett Society to “expose” gender pay gaps — such as the requirement for organisations with more 250 employees to publish wage data — is that it harms business. It triggers unjust demonisation of companies by comparing the salary of a male chief executive with that of a female trainee. It deters businesses from hiring female staff in lower-paid but essential roles. It sows discord among workers. And it tells young women that, no matter how hard they work or how talented they might be, they will never be as successful as their male counterparts.

In the coming weeks and months feminists will doubtless ramp up their panicked reports of women faring worse than men during the pandemic. This isn’t supported by the evidence. From July to September the female unemployment rate was 4.3 per cent, compared with 5.2 per cent for men. The redundancy rate, per thousand, was 10.9 for women and 11.6 for men. Women are disproportionately employed in the public sector, where workers are more concerned about salary freezes than they are about job losses.

The left’s fixation with pay needs to end. Why shouldn’t people choose careers that offer a better work-life balance or flexible hours instead of big headline salaries? Why should jobs be evaluated on wage rather than fulfilment? Far better to circumvent the obsession with female victimhood, celebrate the astounding revolution in women’s lives over the past century, and focus on those areas where women still deserve better.

Annabel Denham is director of communications for the Institute of Economic Affairs think tank

Kate Andrews, Economics Correspondent at The Spectator, has also written on it extensively. For example:

“Would we condone teaching a child that 1+1 = 3, for the sake of increasing her interest in maths? No. Would we praise flat earth theorists for getting people talking about the health of the planet? No. So why are we giving credence to meaningless and often deceptive gender pay gap statistics, which have us focusing on women’s issues in a way that is damaging to women? With Brexit-mania dominating our national debate, you may have missed that today is the deadline for large organisations to report their gender pay gap data.

Now into the second year of reporting, it has become increasingly clear that the influx of data from the gender pay gap reporting measures fails to provide any meaningful insight into fair pay for men and women in the workplace. …The measures don’t even distinguish between full-time and part-time workers, which makes a huge difference to results.

To highlight just how bad the reported data is, look at the accusations made against the National Health Service and its alleged gender pay gap. The public body has been flagged for its 23 per cent gender pay gap – a gap that increases to 33 per cent when just looking at GPs. But the majority of NHS professionals are on a national pay scale, almost completely removing questions of gender discrimination in wages, as they are not subjectively set by managers, but instead set irrespective of circumstance by the state.

Pay differences in the NHS are not about gendered pay gaps, but rather the number of hours worked by employees. Indeed, over 50 per cent of GPs are women, and they are more likely to work part-time. This is not rocket science, nor is it a conspiracy theory. It’s fairly simple stuff when the data is presented accurately. Unfortunately, the current legislation is not rooted in reason.”

Source: The problem with the gender pay gap obsession, Spectator, 4 April 2019,

Also see:

Stop unfairly demonising firms that have large gender pay gaps, City AM, 5 April 2019,

The Gender Pay Gap Reporting Measures: 2019 Update, IEA, 4 April 2019,

Politically Incorrect Paper of the Day: The Persistence of Pay Inequality
by Alex Tabarrok, October 8, 2020 at 7:25 am [extract: Gender wage gaps appear even in markets where workplace discrimination is impossible or unlikely. Uber driver’s for example are assigned trips using a gender-blind algorithm and earn according to a known formula based on time and distance of trip. Yet, a small but persistent gender gap of about 7% exists ( which appears to be due mostly to the fact that male drivers drive a little bit faster, choose to work in more congested areas, and have a bit more experience. Litman et al. (2020) ( show that the same kind of difference also show up in earnings on Mechanical Turk…]


Just Anonymous

I’m baffled, and rather saddened to see that Legal Cheek has apparently censored the comment I submitted on this thread.

I’m struggling to understand why. My only guess is that it’s because I characterised the gender pay gap as ‘drivel’.

If that’s the case, I neither back down nor apologise for it. The gender pay gap is drivel. Those who believe the contrary have had years to articulate arguments as to why we should take it seriously. I have politely called for such arguments on this very site. To date, none have been offered.

Rather the proposition that we must eliminate the gender pay gap is merely presented in the manner of a religious edict: this is just a ‘self evident truth’ that we must just accept, and all ‘blasphemers’ who dare dispute it must be shamed, silenced and censored.


The gender pay gap is drivel. Those who believe otherwise have lost the argument. Unless and until they can articulate a persuasive argument, that is the stance they are going to keep hearing.



There is no credible argument to support forcing businesses to produce this meaningless rubbish each year. It is a disgrace that the government is so keen to court the famed female swing vote that it dare not scrap it. Worse now the BAME lobby is on the bandwagon its production is becoming more firmly entrenched. There is a better case for collecting ethnicity data than gender data, to be fair, although without collecting and publishing proper socioeconomic data too it is of very limited value.



Pointless nonsense that just lets mediocre moaners feel more entitled to play the race or gender card.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories