To consider retraining as a barrister?

[princessglitter]

I am a teacher in middle management with a fairly secure, reasonably satisfying career. I have always dreamed of a career in the law. Originally I considered becoming a solicitor, doing a conversion course and going down the LPC route.

However, at the last minute, I lost my nerve and pulled out of my college course. The idea of that amount of debt was horrifying to me.

I trained as a teacher, but has always felt unfulfilled if I'm honest. As I've got older, the idea of retraining as a barrister has become more appealing, but I am acutely aware that so many fall by the wayside. I have secured a mini-pupillage this summer, which I am extremely excited about. I am also going to apply for vacation schemes at solicitors' firms to enable me to make an informed decision.

I do have a strong academic background and an Oxbridge 2.1 - but I know that that alone will not be enough.

Am I unreasonable to take a risk (with my husband's support) and consider a career in the law? Possibly as a barrister, but I intend to research this thoroughly with some real experience in both areas and different specialisms.

Five years practice, as a paralegal and then apply for a DJ position?

Re Magistrates - recruiting is on hold in many areas. And Magistrates, like DJ's are sentencers. They are not advocates which is the area the OP wished to be part of - so as another poster pointed out, it wouldn't really help her as JP's are not popular figures!

Now there we differ as it's more like riot control in my house (2 boys) and to begin the perfecting I'd have to tidy up all the mess!

Don't do it! Seriously, you've got a good job but, like 99% of the population, you feel unfulfilled. Believe me, almost all the solicitors I know would describe their career in much less complimentary terms than "reasonably satisfying". In fact, my solicitor friends seem on average much less satisfied than my teacher friends.

It's an absolute nightmare in terms of job seeking at the moment for those on the bottom rung. TCs are like gold dust.

A chambers like that, supportive about family etc are the exception to the rule IMO. And you may be able to go home at 12 but instead of putting your feet up after the little ones go to bed you are prepping for your cases next day. For that price I would want the decent salary if I could get it!

Another solicitor here, who has an Oxbridge 2.1. I took the LPC part time after leaving university and then fell into a niche field accidentally, where I enjoy the work a lot. I would say:

*you need to know about Alternative Business Structures for law firms that are coming into force in October. They will allow lawyers regulated by different professional bodies to work together and will allow groupings of lawyers to choose which body they want to regulate them. The effect will be to further blur the divide between solicitors/barristers/legal executives.

*my view is that the bar is a good place to go if you're practicing in a niche field, where solicitors will come to you for your particular expertise in a field. If you're not specialising in something unusual and difficult then what have you got to offer as a specialist advocate that your instructing solicitor can't do for themselves? Under the current rules barristers are more restricted in what they can do compared with solicitors eg. can't handle client money, can't deal with correspondence between the parties in litigation etc.

*part time study was better for me as it allowed me to spread the debt out over a couple of years and meant I was in less debt as I was working at the time.

*think about your field of practice in general; the incidents recounted above are terribly familiar, though I do very little advocacy. On the day I completed on my house purchase I went back to the office that evening to continue drafting an urgent document and didn't finish till 4.30am. At busy periods in the year I regularly bring complicated documents home to draft over the weekend.

*clients are becoming more demanding and some of the syndicates of high street firms are trying to accommodate this, by offering weekend appointments.

Good luck with reaching a decision!

The threads proves how different people's experiences are. I earn quite a bit and my daughters aren't doing too badly either. Without a doubt you are much more likely to earn a lot more money than if you teach and if you're ambitious go for it. If youc an end up working for yourself which you do if you are a barrister and I do as I work for myself and in a sense you do as an equity partner you can earn quite a bit. We all know the top of the bar and top of law firms in London earn £1m+. Nothing like as much as if you set up and sell businesses of course but it's generally better than teaching IF you are any good at it. Just as much as teaching there are lots of useless lawyers around who don't last long and don't earn much.

Oh yes I would add that I wrote a 25 page advice when my baby was 2 days old!!!!!!!!!! That was hard..... my own fault though - I hadn't counted on him arriving early!!!!

On the face of it, this does sound like a pretty crazy idea, especially in terms of what you would be giving up & potentially stand to lose. I do understand wanting to pursue a dream, and you are probably still young enough to do this now. Out of interest, how did you end up in teaching as opposed to the law in the first place?

I am really astonished at the suggestions on this thread that an Oxbridge 2:1 might not be good enough to get a training contract - really?

i'm not sure it means so much once you're over 30, or at least it's not the thing at the top of the CV anymore

Very true and on the age issue one of my girls was saying she was virtually the youngest on the course. People with work experience (like teaching here) have a lot more to provide than the average new graduate.

I think academics are always going to be the key issue when it comes to getting a legal job tbh - they matter enormously, whether you are 21 or 51. I disagree that it will be less relevant for her because she isn't a new graduate.

And law firms are generally more interested in the whole candidate. In addition to the degree class/uni they are also looking for people who are articulate, confident, approachable, commercial yada yada... Some firms may take some very clever eggheads - but on the whole there are plenty of people who can offer the whole package. So a 2:1 from Oxbridge in itself may not be enough.

I wouldn't have thought the OP would struggle to get a TC - she has good academics, has been doing a job that will have given her transferable skills that are very relevant to law and is clearly not one of those 'very clever but no idea how to apply knowledge in any useful way' people.

The bar is a whole different ball game tho - especially in the regions, as most of the pupillages (and tenancies) are in London.

to clarify - I wasn't particuarly referring to the OP.

I've worked with a few paralegals who have Firsts (albeit from non Russell Group unis) yet either couldn't get a training contract at all, or had to relocate to a completely different area to secure one. I'm not sure an Oxbridge 2:1 necessarily makes it a foregone conclusion tbh.

emsyj

"I am really astonished at the suggestions on this thread that an Oxbridge 2:1 might not be good enough to get a training contract - really?"

Of course plenty of people with Oxbridge 2:1s do succeed at getting TCs and it's certainly enough to tick the box for academic requirements, but the degree is by no means a guarantee of a TC. It just means the form won't immediately be binned! The applicant will also have to tick all the other boxes like "commercial awareness" (lots of application forms have Qs like "what law would you change?", "tell us about a commercial matter you have recently found interesting", "what differentiates our firm from our competitors?" etc), work experience, extra curriculars, competency Qs etc. They have to interview well and possibly also have to go through group exercises, online or written tests, presentations... The academics are only half the battle!

The main hurdles the OP will face if she applies for TCs are likely to be lack of legal experience and convincing the firm that she has good reasons for wanting to change careers and go into law, but these can obviously be built upon if she decides to go ahead.

To get a TC you need a very good degree and a lot of luck. The Government trains solicitors . . . over a hundred applicants per place; are you sure that you are that damned good?

Government Legal Service might be good for the OP as the hours are supposed to be better and they say the line is more blurred between solicitors and barristers there. Tough competition though as everyone who likes public law applies there...

The GLS is far more competitive than any law firm IMO to get a TC.

It's 10 years since I was applying for TCs so I am very out of date, but I wouldn't feel too gloomy if I were the OP.

Whether a legal career will be what the OP expects/hopes is another matter! I don't know very many solicitors who plan to still be doing law in five years' time - I certainly have my exit strategy planned!!!

....having said that, it is possible to join the GLS after qualification. I think it is easier to get in that way, but the OP is in the NW and the GLS jobs are mostly in London (altho some in Manchester). I went to talk to the guy in charge of lawyer recruitment at HMRC and he said a lot of the applicants they get for post-qualified jobs are very poor - same comment from guy at Charity Commission.

I didn't think the GLS paid very well which may explain the quality of applicants.

Most people paid by the state as lawyers are not paid that much. My daughters' very recent experience showed the wide range of candidates doing courses. Some of them no way would ever get a legal job anywhere and it's a pity no one was prepared to tell them that. Some could barely speak and write English for a start. Others are excellent.

With most things in life you just have to try and try various routes and see how it goes. If I were here I would try to find a firm to pay the 2 years as that means you know your 2 years are paid for and you have the 2 year trianing contract job after and I presume the best firms in Manchester would do that and will be recruiting this Autumn for people starting the GDL full time in 2013. Get lots of work experience now in law firms and law centres etc too.

Another 10+PQE lawyer here, nodding along sagely with the anecdotes. (Tempted to add a few of my own, but that's a whole other thread....) I work in a large firm and interview candiates for TC's, most of whom have Oxbridge/Russell Group 2:1's or firsts. I have to say it would be refreshing to see a mature candidate, but for your sanity I would advise you not to pursue a career in law at the moment. It really is brutal out there post-recession and many, many people with excellent academics are being turned away and end up trying to pay off massive debt on a paralegal's wage. Law has always been competitive but it's off the scale now compared to 10 years ago.....

The high salaries you read about in law are only really earned by solicitors in the larger corporate/commercial firms. The trade off is that you are required to be available 24/7, no excuses. "Family friendly" really means giving you the ability to work from home after your kids are in bed, rather than shorter hours. Your financial targets will not be any lower because you have three children. This week I have worked about 80 hours and I have not had an single uninterrupted holiday for over a year. Sometimes it's easier but that is by no means an exception.

If you want to work in a smaller firm, then I think £40k would be considered a pretty good wage (although this is not my area of expertise). I have a friend who is in-house at a retailer, 5 years PQE, and on significantly less than that. Factor in the holidays, and I think you are better off - financially and otherwise - staying in teaching for now! Certainly you would be paid more per hour! Oh and as someone else said, my teacher friends are also happier and have fewer grey hairs than me.

Good luck.

True, the pay is what keeps a lot of the best candidates away from the GLS - it stopped me from leaving my MC job as the pay was less than half what I was earning. But I didn't have children then, and the regional salary comparison is much more favourable. Plus you have all the brilliant benefits such as pension, flexi time, option to move between departments if you want to try a different type of work, career breaks...