blog post

In 1919, The Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act was enacted, permitting women to practice law in Scotland, and in the same year, Madge Easton Anderson became the first woman to do so. For International Women’s Day 2025, we want to highlight and celebrate the women who followed in her footsteps. Read on as we interviewed Lindsay Hare and Emma Thomson, Gildeas Directors and personal injury specialists.  

In the second part of our interview, they reflect on what International Women’s Day 2025 means to them, and discuss how they navigate the challenges women face throughout the legal profession today. 

Q: What has been one of the highlights of your career so far? 

ET: There will always cases where you build a memorable relationship with the client, or it may be a particularly difficult fight with the other side! But for me, it’s being certified as trauma-informed. I completed this course only the second year it ran. I am now seeing an awareness of this across the whole legal and justice sector. As I completed the course quite early on, I felt I was ahead of the game. 

LH: Mine is coming back after having my son. Getting back and showing you can still do it. It’s tough when your kids are young. I’m coming out of the younger stage – my son is 11 now, I’m out of the tough bit. But trying to manage it and balance it all, it’s not an easy job. You can be running from one car crash to the next, literally! [Laughs] But that’s one of my highlights, throwing myself back into work and still achieving what I wanted to achieve professionally whilst trying to achieve it personally as well.  

I’d say I achieve a work-life balance, that’s important for me. My career is hugely important to me – I’m very driven and ambitious, I want to do well – but so is my family. My career can be flexible, my family can’t be. So moulding our policies and moulding the shape of this firm to understand that. Work is work, but we can be flexible. I’m a parent 100% of the time – there’s no flexibility in that for me. 

So, that’s where I’m proudest in terms of coming back and working through that. As well, I had some other time out because I had breast cancer so even coming back after that and getting your head around that. I think where our firm is improving is supporting women – moulding the policies, moulding the ideas of the firm, how we strive to run this place – that’s my highlight. 

Q: You mentioned the support of the other Directors, and it helps that we’re a smaller firm. When you’re talking about the balance between family and career, would that be more difficult for someone in a larger firm? 

LH: I could only really speak for what we do and how we work. A lot of big firms are probably clicking on they’re going to lose their brilliant female lawyers because they can’t do the hours that they were traditionally expected to, or at the time they want them done. They’re getting more alert to that. In a bigger firm, there’s probably more people that can help, but there are more traditional-thinking firms. 

ET: I can only talk about my own experience, but there can be more flexibility in a smaller firm, or you can stand out more. You’re not a number. We know our staff very well, and that’s important. There’s a lot of milestones that we’ve gone through and celebrated with our staff – weddings, birthdays, etc. You may be more of a number in a larger firm, or it’s a set of inflexible rules.  

LH: We look at circumstances and speak to people, try and work with them. I’d like to think that goes on everywhere. We can be open to discussion with people, it’s the best way to make things work. Obviously, we’ve got the firm’s interests to look after – it’s not a case of you work half the time and get paid full-time, for instance. But coming up with practical solutions we can make work. We have a degree of flexibility because we know our staff – they’re people with real lives and real problems, and we’re here to support them the best we can. 

Q: What has been the most impactful change for women that you’ve seen across your career in law? 

LH: The increased flexibility the last few years has brought. Covid was hellish, but I suppose the benefit coming out of it was to let people see that flexible working can work. There’s a balance for us – a lot of our staff work hybrid unless they’re junior or in support roles. But that’s got to help, it helps me. For instance, on days where my son’s got to be somewhere before 6.00pm – I can’t finish here and get home, dinner sorted and back out – so I work at home. I like that I can get him where he needs to be. So, the increase in flexible working is one of the biggest changes that I’ve seen within this firm, and I suspect it’s been across the board. 

ET: Across the board, yes. Some firms – depending on what area you practice – may have realised you don’t necessarily need to do the “core” 9 – 5 hours. That’s been quite a change, it’s opened positions up. If you’re doing a litigation role and you need to be in court between those hours, there has to be some availability – but depending on the business structure, it might open avenues. Say, “I want to put my kids to bed and then do a bit of work later on”. The flexibility has had a big impact. I’m not sure that’s specific to law? 

LH: I think law was one of the areas that wasn’t particularly flexible, it was previously a very traditional working pattern. Other areas were ahead of the times on that. Law firms were a bit stuck in their ways, especially smaller firms – 9 until 5, Monday to Friday, you’ve got to be by your phone. 

ET: And no four-day working or flexibility.  

LH: Certainly, over the last few years as a firm, we’ve seen an increase in part-time staff. We’ve got many female staff who’ve gone off, had kids, and want part-time hours and we want to keep them because they’re good at their jobs! [Laughs] They might as well be here and do their job well for three days as opposed to losing them. We’ve got folk that start early, finish early, start later, or they’ll adjust their hours a bit if they’re at home. It is across the board, but law was a bit stuck in its ways. 

ET: Particularly, I think if you’re a solicitor. You might have had flexibility if your role was support staff, but I think if you were a solicitor or a Partner, there just wasn’t any of that flexibility. 

LH: I think IT has made a big difference – it’s got better, that’s been a huge change for law firms. When I started, everybody just came into paper files. Gildeas always used a case management system, but a lot of firms have only started to in the last 5 to 10 years. You were coming into bits of paper everywhere and you couldn’t take it home – so you were really stuck. So, there’s a lot more flexibility now. Firms are run more efficiently. That’s got to be a benefit – as I said, it helps me because I have kids. But everybody wants a bit more time in the house in the evening or has hobbies and things they want to do. 

ET: Remember before covid when you were like, “I’ve got a delivery, but I can’t be in for that delivery because I work Monday to Friday, I leave the house at 8 and I’m not back until after 6 o’clock,” – it’s things like that. Just knowing the flexibility is there. 

LH: That’s one of the most impactful changes. Your work can be flexible, but your family can’t be. 

Q: If there are firms that are still stuck in their ways as you say, what do you think could encourage that flexibility? Do you think it’d be a case of more women coming into senior positions? 

LH: I think that’d probably help. 

ET: An understanding – if you’ve walked in someone’s shoes, you’re going to have a better understanding. I suppose legislative changes as well – there’s suggestions of flexible working requests from the start of your employment as opposed to you having to be there for so long. Although that might be enforced upon them, rather than change because they want change. 

LH: If people could see that you’re at risk of losing good people – you know, because you can’t be a bit flexible – then it’s so short-sighted. People need to open their eyes. 

ET: Recruitment is so hard.   

LH: And expensive! For firms to say, “No, that’s not what we do,” – it’s a short-sighted approach. Your staff are your firm, they’re the most valuable asset you’ll have in a firm. If you’ve got good staff, losing them over something silly like that – I mean, women do tend to take on a bigger responsibility with children, just in our nature – because we’ve had them, we don’t like to give up the control! [Laughs] But if you’re not willing to accommodate that to a degree, I think it’s short-sighted. You need to be open. 

ET: It’s important as well if someone’s working flexible hours or part-time hours, they can still climb up the career ladder. As long as they’re doing the work to be able to do that. It can’t be a case of, “You’ve been in work three days a week, you can’t be a Partner.” That’s important.  

LH: Hugely. That shouldn’t be any barrier. If someone’s good, then they’re good. It doesn’t matter how many days they’re here, they’re still good. 

ET: I think we’re clear – to be doing this role, you’ve got to be ambitious and driven. That’s important to allow people to grow. Family life is important, irrespective of whether you’ve got kids or not, we all like to spend time with our families.  

LH: That’s what balance is. I completely agree, that’s a huge thing. You still have to let people grow, even if they’re not full-time. Although we don’t have many solicitors in that situation at the minute. 

ET: We probably will do at some stage – we have a number of young, female solicitors. 

LH: And they can’t be restricted. 

Q: Do you think there are any traditional ideas across the industry still lingering on? 

ET: Absolutely! [Both laugh] 

LH: It’s hard. 

ET: I suppose – I’m not saying we don’t have any traditional ideas, but I think there might be more across some of the larger firms. 

Q: You mentioned, as you go up – Advocates, and stuff like that – the scale is more favoured in terms of men rather than women? 

ET: Yes. If you’re going to the Bar, you need to give up a huge amount of time to train to do that, and it’s a huge financial burden. You’re not getting paid for the period of time that you’re training or building up your practice. That’s a massive thing if you’ve got financial commitments or kids. Sometimes, as an Advocate, you get instructed at the last minute. That doesn’t always work out with a family timetable. You can’t drop everything, for instance “Never mind picking the kids up from school today! I’ve got a brief to look at.” 

LH: It’s the stability, isn’t it? Income. If you’ve got family to consider, that becomes a much more difficult game to play. I’m pretty sure there will still be very traditional people within the industry. We’re lucky, we don’t hugely have it [at Gildeas]. It’s hard for us to fully recognise, but I’m pretty sure there will be very male-dominated firms. 

ET: I think it depends on what the nature of your practice is. If you’re for example, a family lawyer, there might be a bit more understanding of your family situation. Whereas maybe if you work in a corporate firm and you’re looking at mergers at 11 o’clock at night – there might not be as much of an understanding. It might be a bit more traditional. 

LH: I know, and there will be people who just think that people should be in the office 24/7, 10 hours a day – where you’re not doing the job properly unless you’re there. 

Q: Some people run their business differently? 

LH: Yes. 

ET: Over the last couple of years, there’s been lots of stories about NQ [newly qualified] positions down south and their salaries. There’s been a grab for NQ positions in London. The salaries are in excess of £100,000 – I suspect someone’s not paying you £100,000 so that you can have a 9-5 job! They’re going to want their pound of flesh! [Laughs]  I get it’s that balance of having to live – you’ve got student debt you want to pay off, you want to get on the property ladder, etc. But you don’t have quite as good of a work/life balance if you’re getting paid a salary like that early on. And I wonder – how many people move out of that massive salary bracket? 

LH: Where do you go from there? 

ET: Are you stuck at that starting position for the rest of your career, or quite a bit of your career? I suspect you’re quite chained to the desk. 

LH: I agree. There’ll be a lot of that still goes on within a lot of firms. 

Q: The theme for IWD this year is “Accelerate Action”. What action would you like to see happen in the legal industry to continue to make progress? 

ET: I suspect there’s a massive gender pay gap still, and disparities between numbers of men and women in senior roles. I don’t know whether it’s a timing thing. There are now more women coming into the profession. We might find in 10 – 15 years, there are more women in senior positions. But the gender pay gap I think is still an issue. Part of this is about women knowing their worth and negotiate their worth, although I suspect statistics will show an inequality still exists. 

LH: It’s recognising and promoting the talented women that we have. Getting people into the profession isn’t where the issue lies, it’s that they continue through the profession. It’s really important that we push for flexible working environments and accommodate people, where we can, to make sure we don’t lose our good staff, and they don’t get disheartened and disengaged from the profession. That’s what happens a lot. People come back after maternity, there have been changes while they have been off, or they come back part-time and feel as if they’re getting overlooked for things. They consider, “Oh, I can’t go for that job just now because I’ve got young kids, it’s just too much for me”. Then they disengage and we lose that talent stream. It’s so important that we create as flexible a working environment as possible. We do what we can with the job we have to do, you still need to get your job done at the end of the day – but we make sure we don’t lose the gulf of talent. We push for a good working environment.  

ET: We’ve had a couple of discussions recently, on a separate note that different people bring different strengths. Being a partner is not all about fee earnings. You can’t be saying, “You only bring in X amount because you only work 3 days a week, so you’re not worth a promotion.” Different people bring different assets and skills to the job and that’s important to look at.  

LH: I don’t know if it’s as common now, but in the past, there was this idea that any woman that wanted to be a Partner were total b*tches to work for because they had to work so hard and fight to get where they are. That that was the way you’d exert your management position – but I don’t think that takes you anywhere. 

ET: Absolutely. 

LH: My idea about managing people is – I manage the way I’d like to be managed. I don’t ask my staff to do anything I won’t do. I don’t ask them to work crazy hours unless it’s something that really needs done there and then. And even then – I would see if I can do it myself! So, I just don’t think the idea of super b*tchy women running the place – we need to get away from that, it’s a dangerous stereotype. 

Q: Do you think that’s quite pervasive, or do you think it’s getting better? 

ET: It’s getting better. 

LH: I think it’s getting better. I hope so. I hope that’s not what people think of us! 

ET: I think there are some female Partners in the profession that do have a reputation for being like that. 

LH: It’s probably because of what and how they had to fight for their position. I’d like to think that the path to Partnership, or management is a smoother one now.  

Q: Do you think it’s a fine line that women have to walk between being perceived as a b*tch? That men are allowed to be a boss all of the time, whereas women are seen as a b*tch if they’re assertive? Is that still true? 

LH: Yes. There is a certain degree of that. I think you even hear it with young kids, young girls – “Oh, she’s bossy.” 

ET: When she’s just being confident. 

Q: You both have to navigate many relationships – clients, third parties, if you’re litigating – going to court etc. Navigating that must be interesting considering there are certain rules you have to follow. So, would you say for female litigators that that’s a different ball game, considering you might be perceived differently to men? Or do you think it’s the same? 

LH: There are some. You do encounter difficult clients look down their nose slightly. 

ET: When you’re female? 

LH: I mean, I got called a ‘daft lassie’ recently. But that’s few and far between – that’s a client, that’s their issue and not mine.  The strength comes from experience and age. I could see why younger people would struggle with that. 

ET: Yes, earlier on in your career – what you will tell a client, and what a male colleague tells a client – they don’t quite believe you.  I generally treat my opposite how I’d like to be treated. It’s too much energy to be difficult all the time! [Laughs]  

LH: I don’t overthink it. 

ET: It’s too much energy. 

LH: You do encounter prejudice, absolutely. I had a male consultant once – when I began signing off my emails as ‘Director’, he emailed me back as ‘Mr’ – because Lindsay can be a men’s name, the assumption was made that I’m a man. Now I’m assuming that’s because it read ‘Director’. I actually ended up emailing him back, because he did it about 5 times. I emailed back saying, just so you know I’m female. That’s just gender bias – he probably didn’t realise he’s got, but – he has! [Laughs] But you do encounter it with some clients. As we get older and more experienced, if someone says that to me – I’m ready for them now! [Laughs] That comes with knowledge and experience, you might not be able to do that fresh from university. It’s easier for us as we’ve been doing it for longer. 

LH: I suspect you are less likely to see that with a man. His clients would be less likely to say that. I think that comes from the “daft lassie” sentiment. 

ET: At least your client called you young though! [Laughs] But earlier on in your career, you do find that what you tell someone and what your male colleague tells them – they’ll believe them without a doubt. But they question you sometimes. 

LH: Hopefully that’ll get better. 

This interview was compiled by Samantha Upton, Marketing Manager at Gildeas Solicitors.

Gildeas Solicitors is a recognised law firm specialising in personal injury claims, supporting you throughout Scotland from our offices in Glasgow and Edinburgh. We’re passionate about what we do, whilst putting our clients’ interests first. That’s why we make personal injury personal.

Considering our services? Call our dedicated New Claims team on 0141 331 6070.