Job you love vs money?

[Neolibera]

I’m posting for advice on my dd’s dilemma of what to do post-uni. She’s 22, and coming to the end of her bachelors degree in History and Politics (she did a year abroad, hence being a year older).

She’s very clever and outgoing, but chronically and infuriatingly indecisive. She couldn’t make her mind up about what she wanted to do after university, so decided to apply for a variety of masters programmes and grad schemes, in order to delay the decision. Her reasoning was that all these schemes are so competitive, she’d be lucky to get one offer, so she would just apply for lots of things, and accept whichever one she got, if she got one at all.

As things have worked out, she has been fortunate enough to get multiple offers, but they are for such different things and she is still incapable of deciding... the options she has are:
1) Civil Service Fast Stream
2) Training contract with a silver circle law firm (so they’d pay for her to do the GDL and then the LPC before she starts working for them) - she did a vacation scheme at this firm and really liked it
3) Teach First to be an English teacher (her degree wasn’t 50% History, so she couldn’t apply to be a History teacher, yet for some reason to be an English teacher you only need the A-level)
4) Masters in ‘comparative social policy’ at Oxford (she also has masters offers for public/social policy-related courses from Warwick, LSE, York and UCL, but if she goes down the masters route, she’ll go for Oxford)

She’s pretty sure she doesn’t want to do TeachFirst, as she’s decided that teaching isn’t for her, but she can’t decide between the law training contract, the masters and the civil service fast stream (if she did the masters, it would be with a view to reapplying for the civil service fast stream next year - it’s not possible to defer her place apparently). While she can’t decide between law and the civil service, when pushed, she has said that she thinks the civil service probably aligns more with her interests, but admits that she’s also attracted by the higher salaries available in corporate law (she loves travelling and wants to be be able to earn enough to afford expensive trips abroad).

Does anybody have any advice on corporate law vs the civil service? And is it better to do a masters at a university like Oxford before entering the civil service, or should she just take the civil service offer now while she has it?

I’d do the training contract. She’ll get good exposure to lots of different things, learn some valuable transferable skills, meet a good bright cohort of people and generally figure out how to be a grownup in the world of work.

The masters will be there later for her to do as will the civil service. And I always think it’s good for policy makers to have had some experience of the world other than being a policy maker.

I'd take the training contract - it's the only option which is unlikely to still be open to her in the future. It will be useful experience if she then goes into either teaching or the civil service. She can do a master's any time.

The civil service does offer good work/life balance in some roles (arguably not the most exciting/interesting ones though...) My maternity package as a civil servant was very good, but not quite as good as my lawyer friends.

They paid for her to a degree, locked into the gold plated final salary pension

And sadly, this isn't the case for someone joining the civil service these days.

I have quite a few friends working in magic/silver circle law firms at the moment - getting seconded out to a bank is viewed as boon because you “only” work 8am-8pm. When they’re in house they are working 16 hrs a day. The work experience is nothing like the actual job from the point of view of hours. But it does set you up to go and do something quiet elsewhere. I made a similar decision to do a “big” job, and am training as an accountant - the money is fine, but being permanently short of time is expensive - long commutes, finding time to keep house, or search out nice but inexpensive clothes, avoiding food waste and cooking from scratch are much much harder when you’re exhausted. I’m 2.5 years in and really looking forward to moving into something where I have time to have a life outside work again.

But that’s me not your daughter - some people want to climb the greasy pole, make lots of money, do bigger things than I do. Some people (but very few where I am) thrive on the stress and the speed.

Get her to check out the pension figures for the civil service - I have a friend working in another government dept and they accrue 40th of their salary in pension benefits every year, which is pretty extraordinary and adds a huge % onto their effective salary. I think I’d ask if I could defer and do the masters but if they didn’t let me defer I’d keep the place in the civil service rather than lose it and have to apply again.

The bigger law firms generally have good maternity packages - I have seen up to 9 months on full (lawyer) pay. Pension is not civil service standard but still respectable in terms of employer contributions. There can be other benefits like private healthcare, private dental, employee assistance plans, ride to work, gym. Remote working technology is also high quality allowing occasional working from home (but probably not at trainee level).

I am working from home this entire week. Although I am not a practising lawyer, I work in-house in a law firm and am an example of shoot high and then move to a highly paid but more manageable track later.

I agree with ety that there are people that thrive on the pressure and working in a high octane environment and earn good, sometimes fabulous, money. This is your dd's chance to find out if she is one of them when she is young.

The great thing about starting out in a law firm is that your dd's mind will remain razor sharp and she does not acquire bad habits of lazy thinking or expecting other more people to do the thinking for her - lawyers are paid to think. This includes proofreading at the trainee level as that is thinking - it is not just full stops and commas, it is making sure that the drafting is consistent and the agreement hangs together coherently, which requires her to understand the content at quite a deep level.

A 2 year training contract is a close touch way to sit with a variety of senior lawyers in different fields of practice (generally 4 seats) with the option of an overseas posting to another office for one of the seats. Trainees can have great time and the pay is not too bad.

I cannot speak about other places as I have not worked in them but by and large, law firms are places with collections of intense intelligent high performing hard working people amongst those who stay - those who (validly) don't like the environment would already have left.

I'd take the Civil Service.

I've seen people suffer through a training contract and leave as soon as it was up, miserable.

Wouldn't touch teaching with a bargepole - and I say that as someone who works in education

Masters often don't add much to employability, which is clearly an area she's not struggling in anyway. I'd leave it for now and if she wants to change career then she can do a master's later.

Having had jobs I've loved and jobs I've hated, I'd always take the job I loved over money because I know which has a greater impact on your happiness - and isn't happiness what we're ultimately all striving for?

I have a job I love, not the money to match, but I don't want up every day dreading work anymore which is priceless to me.

^I completely agree

Masters often don't add much to employability

^i disagree. My company only hire graduates with a Masters now

greendale not having a master's clearly isn't impacting the OP's daughter's employability though.

We are in our 30s now & final salary pension schemes are a thing of the past. However public sector pensions are largely much more generous than private. I was looking at a job with a 20% contribution.

Out of the friends I have in law one has left a 200k role as not conducive to family life but she obvs has a good nest egg. One on 50k so not too stressful & can work flexibly. The barrister is a man & works ridiculous hours.

Yeah you get people like blue shoes in a law firm - who think working 20 hour days and creating unnecessary pressure around work make you ‘successful’ and ‘thriving in a high pressure environment’ ie working with people who have no social or family life is a good thing.

And look she even she’s proof reading is great work and good for you ;-)

Says not she’s - I can proof read! I’m typing whilst I’m breast feeding. Cos I now work in an environment where I can have a family and a good career at the same time (civil service). My time in a law firm - I used to cry in loos every day.

rainbows I am sorry for your experience in a law firm. Please do not let your bitterness colour your usual professional objectivity. There are people who thrive on it - I am no longer one of them and have down scaled but I do like working amongst driven clever people) and letting the OP's dd decide for herself what suits her personality and skillset.

PS I do not work 20 hours as an in-house lawyer. Some of the practising lawyers in my firm do from time to time, I imagine, when a deal is closing or big case is on, but the work is cyclical - feast and famine. My workload is constantly high but flexible - I can decide when to tackle it and how late I wish to stay in the office or work from home.

When I was breastfeeding my dcs (which was a while ago as they are now 14 and 11), I was working on the business services side of the law firm and therefore part time, flexible and still well paid.

Options and choices.

The reality is that the civil service is an ok job but very limiting. She is unlikely to love it so much that it will be worth limiting her earning potential/ability to move into a different career. A trainingcobtract on the other hand is treated by many as a MBA equivalent and I quite well paid. Best case scenario she loves it and stays in the legal profession making lots of money-she's already done a vac scheme and enjoyed it so she is unlikely to hate it. If she decides not to continue with law it will be much easier for her to move into a different field such as consultancy (which seems like something she may really enjoy), banking, general business stuff etc. I definitely wouldn't reccomend going into the civil service unless it's something that you really want to do as opposed to thinking that you may enjoy it more than something else.

@Rainbows, a lot of firms have moved away from the bunk beds in the back room culture. How long ago did you do your TC?

Well, there seems to be a pretty even split between posters saying civil service and law!

I’ll get her to read everybody’s advice here and think about the vastly different cultures, so thank you!

One more thing she might want to consider - what does she want the impact be of her daily work. While lawyers (in private practice at least) can work on major transactions or cases, they are in many respects there to do the bidding of individuals, companies or their public sector clients. While at senior levels you may have a strong influencing role you are essentially implementing someone else's vision. As a civil servant fast stream (so the intention is you get senior quickly) you're more likely to have greater influence on outcomes and depending on the area, more able to effect change for a wider section of the population or sectors of it. For me, this would be the deciding factor.

Aren't civil servants also there to do ever-changing ministers' bidding?

Wow, bright girl!

Anything but the teaching I'd say.

Up to a point. A lot of what happens in the civil service is not of a level to attract ministerial interest. And when it does, civil servants can be very effective in influencing the outcomes. Ever seen Yes Minister? Decisions made by private law firm clients can often be made by fora which are quite removed from the solicitor giving the advice. This is based on my experience having seen it from both perspectives.

Outy - not that long ago!

I’d choose civil service. Corporate law wants your soul. It’s long long hours.
Civil service fast track will have boring bits but lots of different options and different directions to choose. Including foreign postings.
With those other options on the table I wouldn’t bother with the masters.
And def not teaching.

Blue shoes - not just one - I worked in a few over 10 years. The magic circle one the worst.
In-house was good - still decent money - you get to shape decisions and nice people but does depend on the company.
It’s nothing to do with the intellence of the people - more their attitude to work. Sloggers do well in private practice - nip in do the work get out to play do well in house or in government. To be fair I’m writing this with the perspective of having done both - I like many people eventually chose having a life over money. Maybe the op’s daughter whilst young should sell her soul - get a bit of money as the other options will always be available to her again after.

alice, thanks for that perspective - that makes sense. I do not work in the civil service nor does anyone in my family and hence, only going by my perceptions. I never really saw it as doing my clients' bidding - lawyers have an input in managing their clients. My clients thought very differently from me as to what they want to achieve. It was fascinating to understand their commercial rationale and economics of a deal and the personalities that influence the outcome and put that within a legal or documentational framework.

The other difference, based on what you just described, could be the turnover of work. In private practice, particularly if you are a deal lawyer, you see the fruits of your labour much quicker as there is a churn of transactions. Even in longer drawn out litigations which last years and years, there are skirmishes in between that present highlights.

I can get bored and would die by a thousand cuts to have to trundle along with a massive project. It is quite nice to be looking forward to the next deal. In bigger firms, the transactions are not all cookie cutter, which justifies the big bucks. There will be some aspect that is new and different and a chance to improve on the previous.

rainbow you sound so relentlessly negative about private practice. Your attitude would set you far far back. Why stay for 10 years when you hated it proofreading so much. Perhaps if you left for the civil service earlier, you would be more balanced.

Sloggers do well in private practice - nip in do the work get out to play do well in house or in government. To be fair I’m writing this with the perspective of having done both

You may have done both but clearly prefer the latter. Is it so difficult to believe that others can enjoy the cut and thrust of private practice?

I am amused by the references to earning money and selling your soul. It does not necessarily come together. However about generally loving your job and wondering how the heck you ended up so well paid? I liken it to being paid to solve puzzles. It does suit a certain person.