Career Clinic: Quitting my start-up in the sun for a return to the UK

I would imagine with great scepticism! Training contracts cost firms a lot of money and they will be wondering whether you really know what you're letting yourself in for and whether you're a flight risk on qualification (if not before). Have you asked yourself how you would cope taking instructions from partners 10 years younger than you and being supervised by an associate in their mid-twenties? Also, as most City associates will tell you, being an associate is not much fun - people stick it out hoping that they'll make partner, which you wouldn't do until you're around 57. When most firms only allow partners 15 years at the top of equity and so partners over 50 are rare, are you prepared for this? Are you also willing to work 10-15 hours a day for the next 10 years? I know about age discrimination laws, so before there are a lot responses saying "age is but a number" etc etc, the point I'm trying to make is that I personally wouldn't do this job and these hours in twenty years time. I'm glad I have the right to, but I wouldn't choose to. The answer to your question ultimately rests on the type of law you want to do - being a conveyancing solicitor at a high street firm is a very different job to being an M&A lawyer in the City.

MC Associate -29 Sep 2008 | 14:36

If you're such a success, why bother becoming a lawyer? Why not sit on a beach?

US Associate -29 Sep 2008 | 17:23

Unlike in the US, ageism is alive and thriving in London firms (at least in the City) despite lip service to the contrary. At 38, I managed to get a training contract with a well-respected firm thanks to excellent academic grades and good partner contacts (established during my time as a banker). I worked my arse off during the two years training period and spent many nights sleeping under my desk in the office. However, despite excellent appraisals, I was not offered a place on qualification. The same questions were raised at interviews (i.e. "would I be able to take instructions from someone 15 years my junior...") which indicates that the firm may have been less comfortable in employing an older NQ. Needless to say, I am now employed and work with a great team of mature people in a firm that offers a great work/life balance. So, if this is what you really want, don't give up hope and go for it. The profession could do with more people like you.

deric khassan -29 Sep 2008 | 18:46

Does anyone hear alarm bells ringing? Unless you have a guaranteed training contract arranged - stay put!

Anonymous -30 Sep 2008 | 09:28

In this economic climate I'd only quit something if I had something secure to go to. And I'm not sure anything is secure at the moment (apart from insolvency and tax). So stay put.

Helen -30 Sep 2008 | 10:26

You should consider your choice of firms to apply to carefully - in my firm (large regional practice) we have quite a number of older/second-career trainees/NQs. They are highly valued by the firm for the additional experiences they can bring and often end up practising in areas related to their previous careers - e.g. a midwife working in clinical negligence and an engineer working on construction projects. I suspect that the larger city/MC firms will be less willing to take you on as you don't fit the standard mould - look outside them and you are likely to have a much more rewarding career.

Anonymous -30 Sep 2008 | 12:29

You sound like a talented person with initiative, enthusiasm and business acumen. This makes what I am going to say particularly hard. Ageism is alive and well out there and whilst not impossible to overcome, it is difficult. It is not clear to me why you would want to put yourself through all that boring study, take a salary cut and work like a dog for no partnership prospects (or limited other promotion prospects). You sound like the kind of person who could make a success of something else.

Anonymous -30 Sep 2008 | 17:05

I don't see it as being a problem- but agree that you'll need to pick your firm carefully. Some do favour older applicants. And the magic circle firms aren't necessarily just focused on TC applicants who are straight out of uni - I knew quite a few trainees at Clifford Chance who came from other careers. Good luck and I hope you enjoy the law.

Anonymous -30 Sep 2008 | 17:07

Running a business is potentially good, but teaching is not - it is seen as a crap job for unambitious people (righly or wrongly). And being old is a problem. You will not be anyone's ideal candidate. Best prospects lie with the sort of firm ideal candidates wouldn't consider. I'd avoid anywhere which recruits a volume of identikit trainees in favour of firms which take on one every few years. Think High Street...

Dullard -30 Sep 2008 | 17:28

On an objective basis, I would agree with most of the comments above and the gist remains that the industry takes a careful approach towards candidates who are over a certain age and 43 is certainly crossing that boundary in a substantial way. But it is not impossible.I also believe that you are not a stupid person and I am sure you have done your homework in terms of checking out the condition of the legal market today (compared to what it was 18 years ago), whether your degree score will still hold you in a high stead when compared to what fresh University grads are achieving today and how qualifying as an English solicitors will fit your long-term aims. With regards to the last point, I am assuming that you want to combine your business accumen with a professional qualification and you believe law would be an ideal professional qualification (over say accountancy) whereby after a certain number of years as a lawyer you would prefer to get back to a business, running your own show. If that is the case you need to do two things - (a) direct your applications to specific firms which value your kind of experience and (b) perhaps be open with them about your plans so that they know they are also striking a positive relation with a chap who knows where he is going and will benefit both sides in the long term.Of course if you don't have a long-term plan and are simply entering the fray for the heck of it, stick to the advice given above.

Turned to law after some years in finance -30 Sep 2008 | 18:31

I think in fact it is also quite a lot to do with how you present yourself - whether you look your age, your image, whether you can charm people. There is ageism but City firms also have diversity criteria which would work in your favour - empl law is more in your favour now too. In the City you would need to fit in - social skills and how you present yourself generally needs to be acceptable - fit one of the moulds accepted in the City (City boy, old school, cool and trendy in a nonthreatening way and in a way that appeals to clients, etc). Also are you coming back to law for money or status or interest? If interest, would one of the niche human rights or other firms which may well be more openminded in any event be more your thing? Still lots of competition but presumably image and age less likely to be problems in themselves. Lots of lawyers reading this will think you are slightly bonkers, and will be more interested in knowing more about what you have been doing - where were you, what business did you set up, and how much money did you make?

Brilliant Advice -01 Oct 2008 | 17:22

I came to UK to practise after 14 years in the Far East. Being in my late 30s, a foreigner and a woman, one would have thought it would be difficult for me to fit into the usual mould that most big practices have. A few years on, and here I am in a large international law firm on my way to partnership. In my case, I was taken in for my experience in the Far East as well as my client contacts. Still I worked 12-14 hour days in the first year (and still do) and being able to fit in with colleagues younger than you is a must. If you are not the usual type of candidate that they all look for, you have to have something extra to offer, and most (if not all) firms will like the idea that you bring in businesses to them as well as certain technical skills which the freshies do not have. My ability to fit in with the juniors as well as the senior partners has served me well in the firm. You have to be flexible as much as you being different from the rest. Be prepared to bend in whichever way that is required and for this you must have a rather high self esteem and confidence. Nothing is impossible, if you believe.

Anonymous -03 Oct 2008 | 11:48

I started a training contract in my mid-30s at a MC firm after a decidedly "mixed" career background running my own business. Qualified at age 38 in 2008. Yes, you will be working for partners your age or younger and taking instructions from associates younger than you. It will also be hard to make a firm understand your previous experience and, more importantly, your motivation for taking such an unusual step. It is not impossible, as I have found out, but I would say it is certainly not easy. The hardest part I found was getting the job. Once I had it then having a "young" attitude was important as work colleagues and fellow trainees can then forget about your age differences (to a certain extent). But you will always get people questioning your sanity and motivations - you will be somewhat "suspect" and hard to pigeonhole. But after qualifying I have found that my "maturity" has been an advantage as you will be trusted to get on with stuff that more junior associates would not be given. In this current climate I can't make any suggestions save that in 2006 it was (just) possible to make a leap from self employed 30-something to trainee at a MC firm but I am very much the exception. I would have thought smaller and regional firms might be better but then again they may normally look for more traditional candidates where as (some) MC and larger firms do recruit from a wider base. Don't give up but do expect hard questions and funny looks and many rejections.

Anonymous -20 Jul 2009 | 17:54