"I am a law grad, and have just completed a masters in International Business Law in Manchester, and have delayed my LPC until 2009, leaving time to gain some practical experience. I have worked with a couple of top 20 commercial firms in the last two years, and have just started an in-house role in corporate compliance.
"BUT...I'm really worried about the recession! I am looking to start up LPC soon, and obviously seeking a training contract afterwards, but with the financial position globally, I'm really worried that this might not be possible.
"Firms are already cutting back on staffing levels in some departments. While a crystal ball is not something most people have to hand, what is the future of the legal trainee? Any ideas.....?"
Ben, Manchester.
Click 'Comment on this article' to post your advice in confidence - or click here to share your wisdom on the Legal Week Wiki, where no topic is off limits. Rate or slate your firm and its rivals with our ground-breaking insider's guide to City law.
And remember, Career Clinic is only as good as the questions we receive, so email your career conundrums to community@legalweek.com.
I'm not in law, but do supply an online product that helps ensure corporate compliance. It seems to me that if you concentrate on corporate compliance - i.e. the policies and procedures that ensure safety and success of the organisation, you should be in a more secure position than many - as long as you keep on highlighting the fact that this is what your work does.
Why will you "obviously" be seeking a training contract after the LPC? Haven't you been seeking one to date? Why wouldn't use all your efforts to seek one before and during the LPC? It seems strange that you are worried about being able to get a job in theory but unwilling to test the water in practice.
First, do some research on recruitment procedures and you will find out that most firms recruit BEFORE the LPC and will PAY FOR the LPC. Second, If you are doing your LPC in 2009/2010 you won't qualify until 2012/13, which should be (fingers crossed) in the next "boom" part of the economic cycle. I don't know of any law firms in the City who have reduced their recruitment of trainees and my firm is currently recruting for the 20010/2011 intake of trainees.
MC Associate is right. Get a training contract before you do the LPC, or don't bother doing it.
Trying to get one later is like only applying to universities through clearing - you might get lucky, but the best positions for the best candidates will have gone.
Your work experience sounds very useful but I am silghtly baffled why you aren't seeking a training contract before your LPC or as soon as possible. Two years in a training contract is a good time to shelter from a recession and, hopefully, qualify in better times.
Get a training contract lined up before you do the LPC. I struggled to do this during the recession in the 90s when I was sitting my CPE. It was horrendous. I pressed on and did the LSF hoping something would materialise but it didn't. By the time the economy had improved there were fresh graduates on the scene and I was old news, sad but true. I never managed to qualify despite all my efforts and as a paralegal I've hit the glass ceiling in terms of career advancement and pay. I know this sounds depressing but my strongest advice is don't embark on the expense of a LPC without having first secured a training contract. To outlay such a large financial commitment in the vain hope that you won't be won of the 'poor souls' who get left behind is naive.
I find the comments, "get a training contract before the LPC or don't bother doing it" mildly irritating. Of course, this is the ideal but it just isn't always possible and sometimes a gamble is necessary. I am doing my LPC part time so was applying for TCs in the summer before commencing my 1st year. I had to take the plunge and start the course as my interviews were not until after term had started. Additionally, my course provider wanted me to confirm my place in the July. Fortunately, I was successful and have received an offer but it was a gamble. Also, not all firms pay for the LPC. In fact, only those in the top 50 do. Limiting your applications to those who pay the fees is short-sighted. Many excellent regional firms offer first rate TCs but don't pay for the LPC. Surely qualifying with some (manageable)debt is better than not qualifying at all??
I wouldn't have done the LPC if I had not been sponsored to do it by my training firm. So, no, I wouldn't have become a lawyer. What a shame - there are plenty of other jobs out there I could have done. If you have rich parents, or don't mind debt, then go ahead and do the LPC without a training contract (whether or not they pay for the course, the fact that you know you have an income afterwards is a big thing). If you don't get a TC afterwards, you may just find yourself with a lot of debt and no job.
Sorry to be an irritant, albeit a mild one, but with a law degree, a masters’ degree, work experience in various top 20 commercial firms and a job already in compliance, the poster would be mad to take a gamble. He would be better to apply now and see what happens with those applications from the comfort of gainful employment. Some gamblers win, of course, and if you are one of them congratulations.
Dullard is spot on.
I am training at a regional firm (that did not pay my LPC fees) and I do not have a rich family. I have a lot of debt and I don’t get paid huge London wages. But I am independent and I love my job and wouldn’t be doing anything else. I think to generalise about a 'legal career' and what path one should or shouldn't take is unrealistic. There are many varied routes that people can take in a legal career. I guess which path depends how individually we perceive success and happiness. Or maybe every law student should apply for a training contract two years before, be funded through the LPC/GDL and get paid a lot of money in the process? And then we can all be the same and agree on everything…
I think people are going slightly off the point. The question was about the future of trainees. I don't think that firms will stop recruiting trainees because of the state of the market - most will be forward-thinking enough to realise that it will need an influx of NQs in 2012-13 and therefore it would be sensible to recruit trainees now. Trainees are also pretty cheap labour in the scheme of things.
I think you are in a similar situation to quite a few people. Some people are lucky enough to get a TC before the LPC, and get it paid for, but there are a vast amount of people who do not and who do the LPC paid by themselves and then then apply for TCs. As a paralegal recruitment consultant, I speak to quite a few people applying for TCs and also with TCs in place and it may take a few efforts, but it is quite possible to still get a TC. The current situation will change and the law firms will be taking on people as they always have. Gaining paralegal experience is an effective way to prepare you for when you do become a trainee and give you an edge up on all those people who were lucky enough to go straight from law school to their training contract, but in a way not lucky enough to gain some legal and commercial experience beforehand. Although I too do not own a crystal ball, I feel that the position of the legal trainee is still very much attainable, it is just a highly competitive market.. but that's what the world is made of - competition!
Latest Jobs
