Post grad law conversions - reality of the usefulness of this?

[BobtheFrog]

One of my DDs is looking to a post grad degree, law conversion in particular - looking for some mumsnet wisdom about this route. Good idea? Concerns / questions we should consider? Does it lead to meaningful work? What kind of work is down this route?

Yes I get that, I just wondered if a first from an RG would compensate.

Re the high street firms I wondered if you could train there and then move upwards once qualified? It’s what I did with accountancy but I appreciate they’re different careers.

A first from a good university will certainly help but many firms still won’t let you apply with anything less than AAB. The applications are done before they have their degree results. It isn’t impossible but I’d try to set his expectations. Practically every kid applying will have either a first or a high 2.1 plus at least AAB. It’s really tough out there and I genuinely wouldn’t encourage anyone to go into law unless they really are passionate about it and understand there’s a good chance they will either not succeed at all or will have to do multiple rounds of applications over a number of years. Even minimum wage paralegal roles are like gold dust.

Realistically he’ll probably struggle to get a training contract as competition is that stiff and need to go down the paralegal and self funding SQE route.
If you’ve trained in a smaller firm it would be impossible imo to move to a large or city firm.
Theres lots of rewarding legal careers outside the large city firms. CPS and Government legal don’t filter in A levels as far as I recall. Local Government don’t. Obviously trade off is much lower pay.

It was possible previously to start at a smaller firm and gradually move up to a regional firm if there is demand for lawyers in your field and you are good, but the increasing use of AI will impact staffing requirements at all levels, not just trainee/NQ level. IMO this will make it harder to move because competition will be greater. Realistically you’re not very likely at all to start at a high street firm and end up at a London commercial firm. You simply wouldn’t have had exposure to the right type of work.

It really isn’t impossible, several people I know have done this.

From high street to magic circle?
I’m over 25 years PQE and have never known that.
Obviously lots go from private practice to in house or public sector but it’s usually other way from largest firms to a smaller or in house often for lifestyle reasons.

Have to agree with @Springisnearlyspring as a fellow 25-peeker. Tbh I knew it to happen once - a senior high st person joined my partnership to do private client for hnw individuals who were connected to the firm’s corporate clients. She didn’t stay long and the big firms tend to stay out of private client these days. It would be foolish to bank on being marketable to a large/city firm, especially when the direction of travel is far fewer trainees and solicitors.

I'm not sure he'd necessarily want to be working in London anyway, but it sounds like he needs to look into other settings like CPS/local government/in house and see whether those appeal. I don't think he'd be that interested in large corporate law anyway to be honest.

It's early days and he needs to get experience in various different areas to see what appeals - he's also considering real estate, civil service/government communications like GCHQ and various other things! He's quite an intellectual (he absolutely loves debates!), so he wants something that makes him think, but he's also very gregarious and wants interaction with people. I know this thread is about law but if anyone has any other ideas they'd be welcome!

It isn’t impossible but it’s less and less likely. I went from small 20ish partner regional to large regional to large international. But the entire profession is going to be changed by AI and the students with top grades are applying for all jobs in all types of firm, including the tiny ones and certainly including in house opportunities. Something is better than nothing in terms of training opportunity.

I agree it is rare and should not be banked on. But actually I have seen it happen. I have been approached by a magic circle firm and a silver circle firm, both times after being on the other side of cases in which they acted as the defendant. But what I do is niche and highly specialised. Someone in the same field as me but a different firm was also approached.

I also know two family solicitors and an employment solicitor who started in legal aid firms who are now in magic circle/silver circle firms.

I am also aware of a whole crime team that was headhunted by a magic circle firm about 15 or 20 years ago, because they needed crime specialists because they would be approached for representation in criminal cases by senior people in the companies they acted for (often fraud cases but also general crime like drug possession).

Essentially, if there is a gap in their expertise, or a role arises in an area in which high street firms act, they are not averse to filling those positions with people who did not start out in MC/SC firms. As I say though, I wouldn’t bank on it and would never plan a career based on that happening.

@Juja Some Social workers decide to convert to law and become barristers. They go into family law and can certainly be successful if they have enough experience.

Not banking on it is an understatement.

Which firms are you referring to when you say Magic Circle?

This is good advice. The one thing I would add is that AI will mess up entry level jobs and it’s not known yet what impact it will have on law jobs overall. If she isn’t absolutely determined to be a lawyer I wouldn’t. The top money is only for people who can stand a terrible work/life balance and it is brutal for women with children. The majority of law firm entrants are women but the majority of partners are men.

If a student wants to work at at large City firm then they need to apply for the relevant vac schemes. 'Unpaid internships' are a double edged beast. The same applies to the Bar.

At the end of the day, if you're a good fit for a Magic Circle firm/ chambers then you'll get a vac scheme/ mini pupillage regardless of the number of applications you put in. I would advise concentrating on a few applications not operating on an industrial scale - that's the surest way to scupper the work needed to get a good grade in your final degree.

There are always stories of '300 applications and no offers' and the conclusion drawn is always that that means a student has to exhaust themselves applying everywhere. It doesn't - false logic. But of course the first requirement is that you need to be good, and a good fit. That's not evidenced by getting work experience of dubious quality from connections or friends. Unless it's robust work experience (through an official channel) it's generally worthless.

At the end of the day, if you're a good fit for a Magic Circle firm/ chambers then you'll get a vac scheme/ mini pupillage regardless of the number of applications you put in.

I don't think this is even vaguely true anymore at I'm afraid (although I agree about the impact it can have on degree work if you spend too much time on it). The competition is simply too great. DS has been extremely fortunate to get one (just five years ago I'm confident he would have had a few). My friend's DS went to a top ranking public school and has straight A*s and a first from Durham. In my view as an experienced and senior lawyer he is a natural fit for law and is a natural fit for city law too. He got nothing last year and it looks like he is on track for nothing this year. This year he has apparently done around 50 applications.

He's about to self fund (but his family can very easily afford this) and try to qualify through QWE but it really isn't the best way to learn the job.

Someone with lower A levels or a 2.2 won’t get chance to show they are a good fit. There’s so many applicants and so many hoops to jump through in terms of applications for vacation schemes that culling by grades is an easy first filter.

Agree that being strategic with applications for any highly competitive field is vital. However, I disagree that work experience acquired through family connections is worthless - quite the contrary. Obviously anyone who does any work experience needs to perform very well during the work experience but IME that is usually the case with internships acquired through connections.

Ceramiq I think your view may be influenced by the fact that this area is your business, unless I'm wrong (in which case, apologies).

No, that sort of work experience will in fact be counter productive these days, in most of the good quality law firms/ chambers.

It is true though, even now, in my experience.

I disagree that it will be counter productive but clearly a situation where you've had to go through a competitive situation to get work experience will look better on your CV than an informal few days which was a favour for your mum.

The problem is that getting a competitive opportunity for work experience is as competitive as getting a training contract since most big forms recruit predominantly via their vacation schemes now.

Not necessarily MC but I do know several people who have gone from high street to large or city firms which is what the person I was replying to said. Obviously not all large/city firms are MC. I do know a few people who have started out in a high street firm and progressed to MC/SC though.

So you're standing by your assertion that if someone is a good fit for a top london firm then they will get a vacation scheme even if they only make a couple of applications in each round? That is clearly nonsense when firms are getting thousands and thousands of applications for a handful of places on their scheme. The maths isn't mathsing there.

I didn't say that though. An applicant who is likely to secure a Magic Circle offer after one of their vac schemes is still highly likely to secure a vac scheme even on a handful of applications. That absolutely computes and that's what I said, in effect.

Maybe not getting a vac scheme after dozens of applications is a sign that a student's career lies elsewhere. These top firms don't especially care about 'commitment' if you haven't got what it takes. I'd also argue that you can't know if you're committed enough for that sort of life until you've been through the training. 'Determination' the same. You can be as determined as you like (evidenced by multiple applications in successive years) but these firms are interested in abilities and character of which determination is only one aspect, and probably not the key one.

It may well be counter productive to refer to work experience which is clearly the result of connections. If you can't show that the work experience was achieved through a competitive process, better in my view not to reference it in an application at all. That isn't to say it can't be useful in various ways, as a learning experience, but not as a look what my parents so obviously organised for me. All the firms know which ones offer above board work experience and which don't so there's no getting round it.

An applicant who is cut out to work at an MC is more likely to get a place on a vacation scheme than one who is not. Absolutely that is the case. The watson glaser filters out a lot of applicants. The situation judgment filters out a lot who have no or very limited experience of working in a law firm. The AI interviews are tough and take a lot of practice since it's odd speaking to a screen with no human signals to feed off. However the same kids are applying to many firms and the sheer numbers applying mean it is still extremely difficult to get anything even if you are excellent.

A firm receives thousands of applications for each place. They may then have a few hundred which are excellent applications and where the applicant could be a good fit for them. But they will then only have a few dozen places on each scheme each year and from that might take 50% on as trainees. You can be a very good applicant and still not get through.