Law Society chief: My £73k role isn't real job

Published on Sunday 16 August 2009 18:51

THE president of the Law Society of Scotland is under attack from solicitors after he wrote in a magazine column that his £73,000 role was not a real job.

As the society prepares to shed jobs following a 1 million drop in its income, and firms across Scotland lay off lawyers, senior legal figures have questioned Ian Smart's judgment over comments made in an article outlining his work since he was elected to office in May.

In the latest edition of the Law Society Journal, Mr Smart lists his society engagements before stating: "And then there was the real job: a four-day divorce proof at Glasgow Sheriff Court; four ordinary courts at Airdrie; coping with the unexpected absence, through ill-health, of two of my five own, long-suffering, staff; the day-to-day legitimate demands of clients demanding to know the whereabouts of their lawyer; and the constant hassles incumbent on those of us trying to make a living from legal aid work."

Mr Smart, a Cumbernauld-based litigation lawyer, added: "Don't get me wrong, I sought election to this job. If it gets too much, I have the consolation of knowing I could walk away."

The comments angered some members of the Law Society, an organisation already under fire from some solicitors over allegations of wastefulness and bureaucracy.

Mike Dailly, of Dailly & Co Solicitors and principal of the Govan Law Centre, said: "At a time when there is a public outcry about MPs having five jobs, and all the perks, and the public saying 'you are being paid enough to do one job', Ian is being paid more than an MP.

"But we are not actually getting him doing one job for the Law Society. He should think himself quite lucky to be getting 73,000 for a part-time job.

"Most solicitors in Scotland and most of the Scottish public would love a part-time job that paid 73,000 a year with all the perks. For that amount of money, you could easily employ two good solicitors."

Another senior lawyer added: "A lot of people are annoyed about it because the idea behind that money was that the Law Society president was meant to work full time for the society."

Mr Smart denied there was widespread disquiet about his salary. "Do people not have any sense of irony?" he asked.

"(The comment] is on the back of an article in which I list the numerous engagements I have undertaken for the Law Society in the previous month."