oxford/Cambridge/Durham/lse

[MommyOfATeen]

Hi
Dd is interested in studying law and then wants a career in politics.
She has being researching lately about alevels and what's best to choose as she will be entering for cheltenham ladies college scholarship exam.
Dd has being researching the law courses and can't seem to answer these questions she has
Why should you study law
What qualities are best suited to law
What books/articles can she read to read around law
And finally..
The colleges at Oxford does it matter which one you go to?

I didn't mean that you gave up all work Word, you've frequently said you're a writer (of crime fiction I think - not sure) and you also once explained the reasons why you left family law, and at that stage you said it was about hours/ young children and the fact that you (understandably) found some cases upsetting. But there's absolutely no doubt that writing is highly compatible with the other partner being able to work long hours, especially if the other partner earns sufficient to pay for a housekeeper and pay for food until the commissions come in. By definition you facilitated your DHs ability to do what he does, but that's a good thing, not bad. Nevertheless his life would have been very different if you'd opted for a City career yourself long term. Also, as you rightly point out, these young people are very talented. There are all sorts of impossible to resolve situations without something giving, such as where one partner is a diplomat etc. Then one or other career, or the relationship, has to give. The Bar is much more do-able for two people in a sense, but not all those interested in law have the aptitude and as I keep bleating, many don't have the funding.

Gently if they aren't concerned (but it seems they are), then they should be. Definitely a very real thing.

molio my decision to quit my legal job was a tough one in some ways, and in others not.

DH and I both planned to carry on working after DC, but our biggest bug bear was that we didn't want a live in nanny. We're both just too private for that to feel comfortable.

And we don't have family living near by. I think it could easily have worked well if either of those options had been doable. Maybe we should even have tried the nanny? Probably. Or moved my Mum into a granny flat. She would have loved it actually. Isn't that what the Blairs did?

Anyhow, we managed ok for a while, then two cases came up that pushed us to our limit (both mine). Looking back, the first one could have been resolved by me growing a pair and speaking up! The second was beyond tricky.

I knew it was decision time. Nanny or quit. Then DH came home and said he'd been offered a job in Chicago. So we went. And I wrote a book for fun. And the rest is history.

And yes, obvioulsy being a writer meant I could work, DH could work and we didn't need a nanny. But we know plenty of couples who went the nanny route and made it work IYSWIM.

Gentlybenevolent

My profession (not law) is currently quite concerned about the fact that the millenials (apparently that's what we have to call them) won't be prepared to work the sort of hours that gen x and gen y put up with. This is a real Thing at the moment, not just in this country but internationally. I'd be surprised if those people in similar international roles to me in the legal profession didn't have the same concerns

Very interesting to hear you say that. What's your own view - do you think that the professions have to change or do you think that the the millenials are being unreasonable by not sucking up the long hours like gens x and y?

I think it's a good thing that employees are voting with their feet and forcing employers to reconsider their business models.

It will be interesting to see how that develops. I certainly feel in the recession and in law/the City there have been masses of top graduates searching for a very few positions and no question where the power lies - with employers able to set whatever hours they choose. I have not noticed a big change there yet. However it might come as the economy gets back on track.

At the moment there are probably at least 20 people just as good as you prepared to tramp you into the ground for your coveted high paid job if you decided you wanted to work less hard rather than employers pandering to requests from new graduates for short hours to fit around their yoga routine. I know my daughter who did a 6 month secondment in a bank recently found the hours a bit of a holiday - nice break.

I wasn't warning anyone off Trinity College. Just meant to point out that Trinity Hall isn't the same place.

Lotus - there is a change in attitudes going on in the city. And internationally. Whether it makes a long term impact is yet to be seen.

It certainly might go back to how it always was - sometimes you work very very hard but on the whole you have reasonable hours and are not every single weekend working all weekend which is not good for people's health.

Lotus you talk of going back to how it was. I see a vast difference between now and the mid to late Eighties. DD1 has spent two years getting home frequently at 2am and sometimes later, then having to be back in again for start of play. You need not just stamina but almost superhuman stamina. Those weren't the hours I knew and weekends then were relatively untouched. I don't quite get what's happened. That said, her firm is exceptionally solicitous about meals, cars door to door etc but these are really not sustainable hours in my view, not for someone wanting a balanced life. I can't for a moment understand that these hours are even necessary. The City functioned before on 'normal' hours, so why not now? I'm not saying this to the daughter, but the hours do concern me greatly. Like your DD, mine did a three month secondment immediately before qualifying, working 9.30 to 5 and she too found it a holiday (partly because of the very different nature of the placement -political- but mostly because of the 'easy' hours).

Interesting Word. I wouldn't have functioned happily with a nanny either. But I think I got the better deal with California though (actually Kentucky first, which was beautiful, followed by California, which was better) :)

molio that sounds unusual (?).

Is she doing transactional work?

DH doesn't work anything like those hours (he's on the terrace now with a beer in his hand). His team of young 'uns are in the bar, I'm sure. No one will work this weekend. DH will not send them any emails or call them. That happens rarely (although on the very odd occasion when he does, he expects a fairly rapid response).

Don;t get me wrong they work hard, but they also work smart. His clients are too savvy to pay for endless hours on a job.

ps did you pass the bar exams for California?

I've heard they are hard.

Can't be that hard my relatives managed.

I meant back to 30 years ago when the hours were not as bad (although the pay was a lot less - senior lawyers on the whole were commuting in from places like Brighton and Kent because they could not afford to live in London and they were not on £1m a year). I think we should revert to more civilised hours as many of us do achieve but not everyone. I know earlier this year one of my daughters worked 4 weekends in 6 which I think is pointless unless you're getting over time. I don't mind working a Sunday if I'm getting £1k or something - it's fine but it's a very different kettle of fish when it's all the time and for no extra pay so I am certainly not a supporter of excessive long hours although all those young people know the score and make their choices. They have plenty enough friends in PR or messing at art galleries or on magazines on the minimum wage.

Daughter 1 is coming here tomorrow and she does regularly make a fuss if the hours get too bad. She is at a firm which can get very busy with partners on over £1m a year I think and they have a lot of work on, certainly in her department. She works with nice people and likes them but the work does get too long hourish at times and too often although she lives 5 minutes from work which helps. Her husband I think earns about double what she does (he is not a lawyer) and yet is home first every night of the year.

Mind you best of the lot is the postman home in time to collect his brothers from school every day or perhaps best deal in the world is mine - work is here in my hand at home any where any time.

Lotus the eighties was thirty years ago. I agree that relatively the pay wasn't extreme. But then I'd far rather that than these mad hours and mad pay, since the former is likely to be far more conducive to happiness. Your DD1 sounds very much in the same mould and boat as my DD1, although her long term partner with whom she lives earns less, but does have an extremely interesting job. And is home earlier, always.

Those have been her hours Word, yes, but she's been moving around departments until now, so it's varied slightly. And no, I didn't pass those exams but then I didn't fail them either, as I never took exams ever again (not much legal work in Death Valley; not much point). (But almost certainly I wouldn't have passed them anyhow, not if they're hard :)). DD1 was born soon after I arrived in Kentucky, very ill, then DD2 in CA then six more in quick succession. Life moved on.

Oh yes, a long time ago. Reading my 1984 diary reminded me of it recently.
I can contrast my younger in house lawyer (the £65k one) with her higher earning (currently) sister and her hours are better although she still likes to go in early as she and I work best early on and as she has no children is happy to stay until 7 or 8 fairly often although she does things like play in her lacrosse team in the week and founded the work netball team so definitely can do things in the week which her sister cannot because her sister will be working.

right Saturday morning 6.30am no better time to work for me..... although I'm perfectly happy about it as I'm at home and it's as enjoyable as when the newspapers arrive shortly or anything else I do except sex.

We were talking about the extreme hours expected of the City professions over lunch yesterday. DH, at one of the Magic Circle, commented that the US expectation of super long hours and availability to give immediate advice has infiltrated here. Once a special effort to get a deal done is made then that client ( and everyone else) expects the same. He freely acknowledged that the "mad pay" means that he and his partners know that their trainees and newly qualified will find it very difficult to break away. Mad pay is needed to pay mad house prices. Regarding relationships - a large proportion of his department have paired off with each other - with no time for social plans outside the firm the staff use the in house gym, GP , restaurant, bar and forge friendships there.

A plus point is that, possibly because of the high pay levels, quite a number of staff are opting for a four day week with consequent pro rate reduction in pay. Or working from home for one or more days a week. He commented that the women solicitors handled this concession very much more reliably and efficiently than the (few) men who had taken it up.

I'm with everyone else watching with interest to see if there will be any change.

And molio and word - if you were both in the firm Word name checked in the mid late 80s then I was in the London Wall office on the other side of the square...

Yes, that's probably a reason - US influence (saw my daughters yesterday and longer hours one is having perfectly reasonable hours at the moment by the way so it does come and go; and other one flew to NY today for work and seemed very happy as it's still exciting for her to get work trips abroad at her age...... whereas I see not going on them as the bonus not vice versa).

I do a lot of work City firms do but am in charge and I can usually set the hours so I'd always try to start meetings early. I will tell people it's 10pm I'm going to bed (upstairs) even if they are abroad. I had something in the last few months were we were having regular conference calls with my US client, me and counsel and we always fixed those for 8 or 9am US time which fitted in with most of us fine.

Anyway they all make their own choices and we have the stark one between the £100k daughter and her £20k a year post man brother who is home by 3 every day and does the school run of his brothers. Both fair enough choices in my view and an interesting contrast. All I want is that they all make informed choices and know the consequences of particular choices. If the older one who is married ever has children it will be interesting to see how they manage their family and I have no interest in forcing or forming their views except as a generalpoint - that in life not putting all your eggs into one financial basket is always wise and wherever possible spread risk and investments.

She could try this brand new portal - based on Adam Wagner's Human Rights blog.

rightsinfo.org/