Could Trump’s DEI agenda follow into the UK?

Donald Trump’s first act as the president of United States was to sign an executive order on January 20 to end “radical and wasteful” DEI – Diversity, Equity and Inclusion – programmes in the US. This prompted several global companies, including Amazon, Meta, Ford and McDonald’s, to go ahead and pull back on their DEI initiatives. The question arises, will more and more companies follow this trend.

It appears Trump’s attack on DEI will not be slowing down in a hurry. In fact it is likely to escalate. Only recently he blamed a plane crash in Washington DC on a diversity programme at the Federal Aviation Administration.

In the financial district of London there are numerous firms that are US-headquartered. American businesses, legal, insurance, tech, etc. are booming in London. Major companies in the capital, over the years, have had DEI as a priority of their internal strategies. While some businesses, particularly Lloyds of London, have made DEI a key priority.

But the backlash from the US has already caused some boards and HRs considerable concern. As businesses work out internally what their approach will be, from a UK perspective, what does the law say? Partner at law firm Siddons, Helen Crossland, is clear that ‘in comparison to the US and other jurisdictions, the UK has greater statutory protections when it comes to discrimination.”

Matthew Newnham, partner at Birketts, explained that under the Equality Act 2010 there are “obligations on employers to take certain positive steps in favour of those employees with ‘protected characteristics’”.

Newnham added that under the current Labour government, “these duties are likely to be further strengthened”. However, Libby Payne, pointed out that “legal obligations and DEI policies are two separate things.”

Payne, a partner at Withers, added: “While comprehensive DEI policies are potentially valuable in preventing and defending claims, on their own they are unlikely to be sufficient, the most important element is the culture of the business. A business with a culture that is not aligned to its own DEI policies will see little benefit from them and similarly a business with a naturally diverse and inclusive culture will have all the benefits in terms of ease of recruitment and retention and reduced liability for claims, even if they do not have extensive policies in place.”

Crossland added that the UK laws “butt against some business leaders’ ideological preferences”, but noted that “rolling back DEI initiatives will risk breaking the law and inviting PR damage that could be unpredictable and commercially costly.

Focusing on the legal sector: A partner at CM Murray, Emma Bartlett, noted that “many UK law firms of US headquartered firms have invested significant time and resources into DEI”.

Her opinion is that this war on DEI in the US is “unlikely to result in such UK firms taking a similar path.” From a legal view on the law sector, she also pointed out that “it is a legislative requirement and a regulatory duty” as regulators, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), “monitors diversity in UK law firms.”

Bartlett explained: “It requires UK law firms to report on their diversity, requires those working in regulated UK firms to treat each other fairly, and SRA Principle 6 provides that solicitors and law firms must encourage equality, diversity and inclusion.”

Payne added that “clients are frequently interested in the make-up of teams, with diversity within a team and an inclusive culture being viewed as a positive signal of a high performing team.”

However, a handful of US law firms in London were approached for comment on their stance on the US backlash. Notably, most of those requests were ignored. But newly appointed senior partner at Kennedys’, John Bruce was clear that “globally, Kennedys remains committed to DEI initiatives – and proudly so.”

The writer is our foreign correspondent based in the UK