Proposals laid out by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) for modifications to its guidelines on well being and wellbeing at work will not be supported by proof, the Law Society of England and Wales stated on Friday.
The SRA’s session is aiming to make clear the regulatory necessities for solicitors and companies within the areas of well being and health to practise and the suitable therapy of labor colleagues. The SRA proposes introducing new regulatory powers in these areas.
Commenting on the modifications, Law Society president I. Stephanie Boyce stated:
“We share the SRA’s want to help a wholesome career the place everyone seems to be afforded respect and dignity. However, we oppose the necessity to introduce extra regulation to realize this.
Existing SRA ideas cowl solicitors’ obligation to behave with integrity, uphold public confidence within the career and encourage equality, range and inclusion.”
Boyce defined on the Society’s issues relating to the brand new rules:
“We don’t imagine the SRA has offered ample proof to justify the introduction of extra regulatory necessities.
We wish to see extra steering and communications to spotlight good apply, notably round talking up and difficult behaviour within the office. Such steering needs to be delicate to how troublesome it may be for some folks to talk out, corresponding to junior workers or these in a minority.
We oppose these proposals coping with well being issues that would have an effect on how a solicitor supplies providers to their purchasers. They are unclear, missing in transparency and run a excessive threat of being utilized in a wider method than has been lined by the session – which suggests they might primarily be used with a person’s capability to have interaction with enforcement processes.
The proposed new guidelines might see solicitors have situations positioned on their practising certificates at any level, they might be required to offer confidential medical data, and that this might have a knock on impact on the attitudes of employers in direction of affected people.
Given these dangers, the SRA ought to have a powerful physique of proof to introduce this proposal and they don’t.”
The Law Society president concluded by reiterating the Society’s provide to work with the regulators on the problem:
“The Law Society’s provide to work with the SRA on this challenge stands. Solicitors engaged in regulatory work have in-depth data of the problems the SRA raises and the Lawyers with Disabilities Division needs to be concerned in any proposals that would have an effect on their members.”