lawyers! Is a 2:1 good enough to get onto a top law firm?

[vouvrey]

Hi

I'm doing a p/t law degree with the Open Uni. On track to get a 2:1 but is this good enough to get a traineeship with one of the top firms (not necessarily magic circle).

Also is it easier to get traineeships in Birmingham/The North? Do these always pay significantly less than London?

Also once you are in one of these big firms how much choice do you have about which area you specialise in?

Thanks

I get the impression that there are a lot of factors involved, including the class of the degree - where you studied, what work experience you may have gained, other relevant industry knowledge and so on. Age I think plays a part. I know that the conversion courses recommend that people over 35 for instance take a hard look at the fact that the big firms will likely be looking for younger graduates (laws pending and all that).

have you checked out a website called trainee solicitor? It's a bit mixed but there are some interesting bits and pieces on it. I've been looking at a change into law and I have noticed that it is unspeakably competitive. I've had to do a full application form, a telephone interview, and will be going to a 5-hour assessment centre for...wait for it...a WEEK'S vacation placement . and that's not even a magic circle/city firm. not even a London firm.

I get the impression that to stand a chance a 2:1 is your absolute minimum - and it will need a lot of other stuff on your cv - legal and non-legal. apparently they like marathon runners.

smallwhitecat is dead right - 2:1 is a minimum (they will look at the underlying grades as well) - you will need something else standout as an OU graduate rather than Ox/RG but they are a little bit broader-minded these days than they used to be.
You will rotate around departments as a trainee and then in the bigger City firms anyway you will get to state your preferences for qualification and they theirs - in most cases they will match up somewhere!

I also have a RG degree but only a 3rd and 5 years experience of legal-type work ie advocacy+representation.

Am I still pushing it?
(only 30yo btw)

vouvrey - have you applied for any vac placements? I think you'll find the process, and the placement, reasonably informative. You've probably missed a lot of deadlines for this summer - but possibly not all.

I think also you need to have quite a specific plan - you need to have an idea what area of law you fancy, what kind of work culture you want, what firms will provide it. From there you can start to explore more specifically what this or that particular firm in this or that particular office want. Some are open to speculative cvs (but not, generally, the big ones) seeking work placements. I think you could learn a lot if you send out some cvs, and follow them up with a telephone call. It's a bit pot luck but if you have a specific area of law, can illustrate interest in it through your cv, and can target specific partners you can end up having some interesting chats - with HR people or partners. I think your 3rd could be a bit of a hurdle - you'll need a lot of extra stuff on your cv - but if you can get someone on the phone it can be very helpful.

Just to say be careful what you wish for as well. Qualified lawyers leave the top city firms in their droves at 2-5 yrs PQE, when they realise how utterly brutal it can be on their family lives. Firms are trying to improve this, but it will never be easy because ultimately the client's expectations will prevail (ie "I want it yesterday"). I assume you're a mum (this being mumsnet, sorry if that is an incorrect assumption!) so just wanted to warn you you will need to have a supportive partner and excellent home/childcare arrangement if you plan to train and practice in one of these places. Good luck!

hatwoman-what other cv stuff other than my work experience?

basana-I have 2 DCs (may have another) but my partner is happy being the main carer/SAHP. That is why I'm asking about pay. I know I couldnt do this kind of job if I had to do the nursery/school run/cook dinner etc etc so I have to earn enough to support DP to stay at home (maybe work p/t weekends). We are both happy with this arrangement as long as it is financially viable. I'm also planning to send eldest to boarding school in 5 years time.

I expect the hours to be long, that's one of the reasons why I delayed going down this career path until after I'd had DCs. I could never do it with a baby and wouldnt want to get discriminated against after maternity leave.

You have to be super special in other areas to have a top company interested in OU 2:1 degree. You did not mention what law your are practicing. Do you speak unusual languages that will attract business from new markets (chinese, russian)? Any particular insight knowledge of the industry (finance, corporate)? You maybe an absolute gem of a professional, I have no idea, but given that there are plenty of polished applicants from top universities (no disrespect but OU is not perceived as such) you need to wheel out all your guns out at the interview. If you get that far. Good luck!

I actually think the best way for you may be to target top companies (their legal departments). They usually hire outside legal firms to do really specialized stuff, their legal departments will have initial assessment and make the final decisions. It is something that people overlook, but then after 2-3 years you can apply to whoever you want (including the magic circle) and they will take you much more seriously. (Example, all financial transactions that are not standardized will be prepared and checked out by inhouse legal of the relevant institution. This can be rather tedious, so usually given to the junior on the desk. If turnover is high and it is a lucrative market the experience will be highly valued by proper legal firms as they usual do not have such expertize themselves.) Just my opinion.

vouvrey - I should say I'm no insider expert! but I've talked to lots of lawyer friends as well as a couple of firms I'm interested in, and, of course, have trawled the web. some firms - but not all, do like (or, at least claim to like) "rounded" people. The people I've got an interview with say they do - and they asked a lot about extra stuff on their application form - I was able to mention a number of (legal) publications; voluntary consultancy work for a number of relevant NGOs; marathon and other long-distance running; voluntary work for Brownies and school. thinking about it I would recommend looking at application forms for the companies you like - then you can see what they ask.

Thats a good idea about looking at the app forms.

I take it childraising isnt an extra curricular activity they value?

Don't be disheartened. I am sure they will value, but it will depend on how you dress it. There are good mothers and bad mothers and having children as such will not take anybody's breath away i think. You should argue in such a way that your potential employers have no choice by agree that the skills you have developed whilst mothering are outstanding and relevant to the job. Just be creative about how you do it.

Others may disagree, it is just my opinion.

My own view is that your childcare skills are not something that would be of particular interest in an interview. I could be wrong as it was not an issue for me when I was moving through the process, and I know that recruitment has moved on a lot since then (eg they try to attract and recruit from a wider pool). I also don't personally believe that being a good parent is necessarily relevant to whether you have the potential to be a good commercial lawyer (although you can be both, one doesn't follow from the other). I think you are better to take examples from your previous career or any heavyweight stuff you have done (your advocacy/representation stuff will be of significant interest I am sure). I think many firms also have some type of written legal reasoning test for trainees as well as the usual app form and interview, which may give you the opportunity to shine. I would imagine a lot of the firms you are interested in by now have quite sophisticated recruitment sections of their sites. If the family stuff comes up in interview, great - firms are trying very hard to be supportive of working mums, and you can make your case then - but I wouldn't focus on it in an application as to why it makes you a good candidate, myself.

I'm sorry to have to say this but I think you'll struggle in London. The top firms will have so many preconceptions of you based on your background that you might not even get to the interview stage.

The most difficult thing for you to over come will be having got a 3rd in a previous degree.

They won't look kindly on the OU either plus sadly they are not madly keen on hiring mothers of young children (they know the hours they want you to work and really compatible with a family). Also the city firms might not be as wowed by the advocacy as you'd expect - not something they'd expect you to be doing once working there (as they farm that all out to Counsel)so a corporate or financial background would be more useful to them.

Sorry, I know it is not what you want to hear but I worked in a top London firm before having my DC and DH still does so I know from experience how strict the criteria are that a CV needs to meet to make it part the initial vetting stage.

You'd do better to focus on a smaller or niche firm. Pick one doing lots of litigation so that you can put your advocacy experience to use. It will mean lower pay at the outset but it is easier to move about once you are qualified.

Good luck

Well this thread has killed my enthusiasm for doing my OU work.

I thought the OU was well thought of. It isnt some post-1992 ex poly, you know!

I'd read that employers valued OU degrees because it showed the ability to combine work and family and that you had dedication to your subject rather than just something you picked at random at 18.

I was thinking of not mentioning my previous degree at all because I know that the 3rd doesnt look good. I do have special circs for that grade but I dont want to have to go down the road of having to explain that to employers.

By the time I finish the LPC the DCs will be 12 and 7 and DP will be their carer not me. I thought that would give me an advantage over younger women who haven't had a family yet?

If my advocacy and representation experience isn't going to be valued by firms of solicitors then should I do the BTCP instead? I had originally wanted to do that but was scared off my the cost and the 1 in 5 employment rate.

vouvrey - I think some law firms will think along the lines you say. I think it's a case of doing lots of research and seeking them out. they might not be the top / city ones though.

You might not get away with not mentioning your 3rd. The form I had to fill in was very explicit in saying that you HAD to put down ALL public examinations - including ones you had failed (given the choice I'd have omitted my crap O levels).

I'm in a similar situation to you re kids - mine are 8 and 10, dh works 2 days/week. I'm not planning on making it a big deal, certainly haven't mentioned it in writing, but am kind of hoping it comes up at my interview - as I do think this makes me a more secure investment, iyswim. ditto my age. this is a really important decision for me and there'll be no going back. so I hope that's something else I can market

I think a 2:1 from OU would be considered, but they will look at it in the round. As soemone else has said they will be particularly interested in why you got a 3rd. Can you explan that away? They would not recruit someone with a 3rd, so you will need to convince them that the 2:1 is more the true reflection of your academic ability that the 3rd. Can you do that? I think they would be more convinced if your OU degree was a 1st, and I think with a 2:1 you should give a lot of thought to how you can explain the 3rd and address this specifically on your application form.

vouvrey - I do have 2 OU courses (not degrees) under my belt and I did enjoy doing them, for me they were a preparation, a step up towards what I was going for. One was in Economics that allowed me to go to university having previously studied something completely irrelevant (very good and useful nonetheless) at another uni for 2 complete years. I went on to work in the City for the best two teams in their field for 12 years. Another was history of art that allowed me to get my masters at top art history school. Employers do value them but then you are not targeting just any odd job. You are going for top professional segment and should be realistic about who you will compete against and prepare accordingly. I see the problem with 2:1 level rather than OU as such, because you could always argue that there was no choice for you but to go for correspondence course when you have a young family. 2:1 to me says either it was academically challenging or that top marks is not the aim.

The reason I will only get a 2:1 and not a 1st is because I took on too many courses simultaneously, then didn't get the nursery place for DD I'd been promised then had a miscarriage that left me ill and anemic for a month.

Uni the 1st time round was even worse! I suffered DV, bereavement, hospitalisation during my finals etc etc. It was one disaster after another. I should have taken a year out but my parents wouldn't let me so I ended up not submitting half of all my assignments that counted towards my final mark. The ones I did were all 2:1 standard.

I never seem to get a clear run!

At school I got the Scottish equivalent of 3 A* at A level if that would help?

At a push I could re-do last year's course (would cost £2k) to get a 1st, but would a re-sit be worth it?

This is exactly why it is pointless asking "is OU 2:1 ok or not?" Because on the face of it, "no" is probably the answer, but if you can explain that your studied with the background of all the challenges, it may be a different story.

In this case, I would say definitely research carefully and target firms individually. I would suggest network as much as you can and seek the names of the heads of departments where you would like to work and/or address your correspondence to a person rather responsible for recruitment rather then "HR". It is more likely that the person will read your cover letter rather then bin it and go straight to CV.

How come an OU course is 2K£ now??!

Hi Vouvrey

I work in a leading regional firm (in the midlands) and am involved in the trainee recruitment (to some extent). We have a 2:1 minnimum for trainees but are not 'snobbish' about where it comes from. What really helps on recruitment is getting some good work experience. I know a lot of firms offer vacation schemes and use these as a fast track to identify people they would be interested in taking on as trainees.

I thought about going to a London firm when I was looking at training contracts, seven or eight years ago, but made a lifestyle choice that the long hours and uncessary pressures were not for me. The work life balance in the regions is way better and I would certainly recommend it. The pay is less but hey is it worth earning a load of money if you have no time to spend it!

I occasionally do recruitment for my firm. And I have to say you'd have to be lucky for me to pick you out of the pile with a 2.1 from the OU particularly with the previous 3rd. Was that a blip? what were your a levels life? Can you explain what happened then and why you've changed now.

Now occasionally I do pick up people who look interesting who don't have the traditional 2.1 from oxbridge/russell group. I am actually slightly more likely to pick up people with 2.2s from a good university, and a good story to tell as I think that the 2.1 is too artificial. It wouldn't make a difference to me whether it was a 2.1 or a 1st though. What would matter would be whether you stood out for other reasons so I read your application and thought about it.

The best I can say about those other reasons to make you stand out are

Get work experience in law, big firms, small firms, high street firms, courts, anything you can. You said you did advocacy representation before. Where? Can you target lawyers who do the same kind of work to get that experience onto your CV. You also have to offer to work for nothing to get that kind of work experience in some places but even a week here and there shows commitment.

Show your commitment. Show that you did the OU degree because you really wanted to be a lawyer, and explain why you really wanted to do it (and don't mention the money at that point!) have you got any particular area that sparked your interest?

Think hard about what type of work you can do well, what does your previous experience help with. If you did representation for say a bank on mortgage reposessions look at people who have general litigation teams (not magic circle). If it was employment representation for HR play to employment lawyers.

Have you got any perosnal networks you can pull favours in from. Who do you know who is a lawyer who may be able to help you out with experience. Even if you don't know them well, if you don't ask you don't get. What about your tutor at the OU, do they have connections. What about mothers at the nursery/ schools?

Also think about local networking events where you might bump into lawyers, lectures, industry groups etc. Visit public hearings, tribuanls courts. Show you really want it and you'll stand out as you may be more commited than the conventional applicant.

sorry didn't read the last post about your reasons for the 3rd and your a levels, that will all help provided someone looks at your application, and reads it. I wouldn't explain the 2.1 1st issue but I would put something about your ist degree on an application, as that is the bit which would make me wonder.