To re-train as a solicitor?

[FithColumnist]

At the moment I'm a teacher, and I'm looking at alternative career options as I desperately want to get out. I was wondering about soliciting...

I graduated with a first in Modern Languages, and would be looking at doing a conversion course like a CPE or GDL. Has anyone done anything similar? I'd love to hear your experiences and stories if so- one thing that's preying on my mind is that I'm 34. Is that too old to be changing careers in this way?

@Creambun2 The civil service do still offer training contracts. Over 50 every year in fact.

We don’t care about Oxford/Cambridge or what your daddy does. We do care about your skills: your ability to lead, to collaborate etc. It’s one of the reasons we accept more candidates on second careers than most and about 40% are non law graduates.

Work life balance is MUCH better than city firms. But the pay is MUCH less and the hours vary significantly by role and experience. I’ve generally done 9-5 with occasional late nights (midnight) when working on a Bill or attending Parliament. But lots of my friends do consistently long hours.

If you’re leaving teaching for a better work life balance law is not for you.

@clareb83 As someone with much experience of working with GLS members I disagree that university studies at and to an extent background is a factor in recruitment. Christmas dinners at london "clubs" (funny how everyone was a member) and continual reference to "Jurisprudence actully" being recent classics.

As I said in my first post, MFL teachers are far more in demand than lawyers. I think you'd be better off finding an easier ride in teaching.

@Creambun2 I am a GLS member (not GLD). I’ve been involved in recruiting new trainees for many years. The process is blind to where you went to Uni. It does not appear on any of the materials used to sift or assess applicants.

This wasn’t the case in the past, but has been for quite a while now.

It is evident in the mixture of backgrounds of our new recruits that this is working. In 2017 we made 47 offers to students from 28 Unis, including less traditional law Unis such as the OU, Leeds Met and Central Lancs.

There is of course an inevitable advantage in knowing people within the profession in getting good work experience etc. However, we are attempting to rebalance this as well by only offering summer placements via charities that target those from backgrounds historically underrepresented eg BAME and those that are first in their family to go to Uni. Again in 2017 this is reflected in 22% of offers being made to BAME candidates compared with population average of c.14%.

I don’t have statistics on class mix to hand but of the dozen or so recent trainees in my department it’s mainly middle class, several working class and no one born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

OP I was also looking into it recently - and I am 48. I went right through the SRA website, and can tell you, that if you are lucky enough to get a training contract that the recommended salary for trainees outside of London is circa £16 k.

That's after the cost of the cost of the conversion course and Legal Practice course which will take you some years and which costs approx (depending on where) £25k.

I am now looking at a possible Legal Exec route as although I also desperately want to retrain, I can't afford to spend that amount on studying (while losing my salary) and then only to take such a massive cut for a few years assuming I even get a job.

Dh and I often say we were too late by 50 years or so - life looked good for solicitors in the past - well respected, well paid and shorter days. It's all been downgraded now somehow.

I wish I had gone into legal marketing shortly after I qualified my neighbour does that and it's way less stress, flexible and shorter hours. However like the swot I am I slogged away in a magic circle firm doing international deals. I used to work round the clock and jet off round the world at the drop of a hat I ended up with boils and a twitch! Never went back after mat leave nowwork for myself. Can't comment on how hard to get into now but we won't be advising dd to do it.

That's good Clare - I went to a magic circle as a junior associate in 2001 and all the trainees were super posh. My trainee who did my photocopying was Oxbridge former head boy at harrow they were pretty much all like that.

I would like to add that law needs more women.

Perhaps a critical mass can be reached where these family unfriedly practices can be changed.

Also for anyone who is looking into it- the University of Law does Open days. I am still going to go to one in the new year just to find out more. But that might be of use too.

Often the senior women in law are the worst in terms of their approach to flexibility..

@NewtsSuitcase why do you think that is? Because they had to be so tough to get there that they have a sort of a "I did it so you have to too" attitude?

If you are in the top 1% of graduates - you have excellent Alevels, excellent university, etc etc, then it is a great career (albeit long hours).

If not, it is extremely difficult to get into when you are doing it at the usual time, let alone as a mature student. The first two years training are very much underling service roles. It does not always suit mature students who are not used to taking lots of instructions and doing what they are told under intense supervision and training.

Often the senior women in law are the worst in terms of their approach to flexibility

What do you mean by this? Are you suggesting that because they're more likely to have family demands which renders them unable to commit to the long hours or that they have a tendency to pull up the drawbridge after they've safely crossed to the other side leaving other women at a disadvantage?

Why not do an MA in Translating? You could work from home with that and be freelance, too.

60%plus of lawyers qualifying are women. In my dh office you are hard put to find a man frankly but the lack of flexibility in many practice areas means that they often give up or go part time when family comes along.
My dh bends over backwards to accommodate women coming back but they often just don't. Frequently they are married to lawyers and have decided that they will focus on at least one of them getting through that magic partnership door . Frustratingly it seems that it's usually the man.

I've noticed this trend among my friends Yellow, at training stage there was parity among men and women and dare I say even more women. Now a lot of my female friends have got married and are family planning.

One friend in particular had to turn down a lucrative promotion for a 2-year stint in Hong Kong because she just wouldn't be able to hack it with a very young baby and the demands of that particular role. Don't think a single man in his early 30s would have given it a second thought, he'd have packed his suitcase before the ink was dry on the contract (all else being equal that is).

@NewtsSuitcase why do you think that is? Because they had to be so tough to get there that they have a sort of a "I did it so you have to too" attitude?

I suspect that is part of it yes. Most very senior female lawyers have had to sacrifice a lot and haven't had the flexibility throughout their careers. They were at the bottom 20+ years ago.

In my experience either females drop out once they realise how hard it is with children, or they go part time. Either way it means there are fewer of us at the top.

And I guess the nature of lawyers also means we are less likely to be understanding about flexibility and more likely to be demanding and expect an awful lot?

IME the flexibility in the legal profession comes once you're at the top and you've managed to prove yourself. Even then it is less likely to be structured flexibility eg part time hours since that could indicate you are not as serious about your career and is more likely to be "i'm disappearing for a few hours to watch the school play and nobody will question me because I'm an equity partner"

How about looking into Ombudsman jobs? Pay around 40-50K and very flexible hours/can work from home.

DH was at Cambridge and the friends from his course are all women as the men were largely knobs (in his opinion, he has male friends from from other courses but law seemed to attract a certain type of man). We met up recently.

Only one of the women had stuck at law and made partner, she was the only child-free one. These were top of the tree candidates so totally capable. All the others who were mothers were teachers, in house lawyers at schools, SAHMs, working in music. I know anecdotal but not an endorsement to the family friendliness of law.

The chief exec at my last firm (I now have my own firm) used to refer to me as a "young mum". I was 40 and an equity partner working full time and was widely regarded as extremely good at my job . It was somewhat surprising therefore that "young mum" was what apparently defined me.

Well i just looked up women/partner percentages. That is shocking.

Another one here to say DON'T DO IT . Unless you have a burning desire to study law and be a lawyer and have a real interest in a certain area, I wouldn't recommend trying to switch careers to law. It will undoubtedly be longer hours and probably lower pay than you are used to (and I say that knowing how hard teaching can be) and the battle to even get a job is crazy. From my GDL group, 3/4 of the class haven't secured a training contract almost a decade on. On the whole they were very intelligent, motivated people with lots of great things on their C.V. Unfortunately, as previous posters have said, the number of law students greatly outnumbers the number of training contracts/pupillages.

If I knew the reality of the job there's no way I would have gone into it (insane hours, constant pressure (whether work deadlines or billing) not great pay, questionable characters and many many females mysteriously vanish once they have children!).

Sorry to be so negative. If you're certain you want to leave teaching, I really hope you find something satisfying that you can move into!

Perhaps a critical mass can be reached where these family unfriendly practices can be changed.
What is happening, is that private practice is losing high calibre lawyers (and fee earning work) to their in-house former clients. We can offer flexibility and high quality work; and it’s substantially cheaper for me to recruit another good quality lawyer who would like flexible working than it is to outsource our work. Plus they get to know the business better so are much better at providing “added value”.