Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account
NQ Solicitors logo

NQSolicitors.com Legal Blogs

Ian Roberts

by

Will the new Solicitors Qualifying Exam meet the SRA’s goals?

The introduction of the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) in 2021 will radically change how people enter the profession. The Law Society says the new two-part exam will drive up standards as well as reduce costs to students, remove barriers to entry and create a more diverse profession. Details of exactly how the SQE is going to work in practice are unclear at this stage but in this blog we’ve set out some thoughts on whether the new ‘super exam’ will meet its goals.

The SRA’s stated aims in introducing the SQE are to provide “a more reliable and rigorous test of competence than is possible at present” and “introduce transparency and competitive pressures to drive up standards and reduce cost”.

In order to achieve this, the qualifying process is being dramatically revamped.

How the SQE will work

Let’s start with a brief overview of what an aspiring solicitor will need to do in order to qualify once the SQE comes in (which is currently expected to be during the autumn of 2021):

1. Students will need to pass both stages of the SQE assessments, SQE1 and SQE2.

SQE1 is a test of legal knowledge and will comprise a series of written, mainly multiple-choice exams, and a written test of legal research and legal writing. It is expected that students will take SQE1 following completion of their university education unless it forms part of their law degree (which we think is likely to be the case in many instances).

SQE2 will test practical legal skills such as client interviewing and giving advice. It is anticipated students will take this exam towards the end of their ‘work experience’ (see below). This means firms will have to release their trainees to prepare for and sit the exam.

2. Students will need to have completed two years of work experience.

This can be completed with up to four employers and some of this can be acquired before a student sits SQE1. Experience gained as an apprentice or paralegal or during holiday work experience could count towards the required experience.

3. A degree or equivalent (in any subject).

4. Satisfaction of the SRA’s character and suitability requirements.

There is no requirement to complete a preparatory course before taking SQE1 and SQE2. In theory, someone could take both parts without going on a single course. They could also gain the necessary two-years’ work experience without undergoing a formal training contract, relying instead on a solicitor apprenticeship, placement work or work experience. Would this “drive up standards”?

The Junior Lawyers Division (JLD) has queried whether the fact that no preparatory course is required will make things harder not easier for some students. Chair Adele Edwin-Lamberton says: “We do not feel that just because the SRA has not specified that a preparatory course is mandatory, that this will prevent students (and firms) seeking a programme of study to assist them in passing the assessment, leaving those unable to afford a course at a disadvantage.” If she is correct, this clearly raises a diversity issue.

Another concern is the fact that not all universities will include SQE1 in their undergraduate law course, meaning some students will have to pay for and prepare for SQE1 after they leave university. Even if it is included, it raises a number of questions: when a university does include SQE1 in its degree course, who will pay for it? Will it be included in the cost of the degree or will it be extra? Will it be compulsory when a degree has it in the syllabus? We presume the answer to this last question is no, as many law students will want to qualify at the Bar rather than as a solicitor.

It has also been pointed out that because the preparatory courses are not mandatory, it will not be possible for students to obtain a professional studies or career development loan to cover the cost. This would seem to raise barriers to entry rather than remove them.

Also, although the SQE exams cover similar areas and topics to those under the current regime, unlike the GDL and LPC, SQE1 does not contain any electives. We believe many of the larger firms will want their trainees to have specialist knowledge of the areas they cover such as corporate finance, banking, etc. They will either have to provide this in house or require their trainees to have attended courses provided by external providers on additional subjects.

This could lead to a split between trainees who have benefited from additional training in specialist areas (either in house or on an external course) and those who have simply completed the basic SQE1 and SQE2 requirements.

There are also concerns over the nature of the exams themselves, with Edwin-Lamberton expressing misgivings about the exam format saying she is “not persuaded that the use of multiple choice questions offers a rigorous means of assessment”.

There is little doubt though that the current LLB, GDL and LPC courses need more than a little refresh. Nigel Savage, a former head of the College of Law (now the University of Law), has criticised providers for “peddling versions of the GDL and LPC and very tired LLB programmes that are already 30 years out of date”.

In fairness, the providers themselves have largely welcomed the changes with Pearson Business School vice-principal Ben Hughes saying: “The aims of the SRA in shaking things up so dramatically should be applauded.”

What providers are less happy about is the shortage of information from the SRA about costs, the timing of assessments and the breadth and depth of practice areas.

With so much up in the air it is difficult at this stage to draw firm conclusions about whether the SRA will meet its goals. We will certainly be keeping a close eye on developments as more details become clear.

In the meantime, in our next blog we will attempt to answer some of the key questions being posed by both students and law firms about the new qualification process.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account

by

Spotlight on Bristol: why relocating from London could be the best decision you ever make

Not only is Bristol one of the most thriving legal centres outside of London, last year it topped The Sunday Times Best Places to Live Guide. The city was described in the guide as ‘a small city that feels like a big city, handily placed for seaside and scenery, but hardly cut off from the rest of the country’.

It is no surprise therefore that Bristol is such a popular destination for ambitious lawyers seeking that all-important work/life balance.

We spoke to Angela Parfitt, Resourcing Specialist at independent UK law firm Burges Salmon LLP and asked what Bristol in general and Burges Salmon in particular have going for them.

Burges Salmon is renowned for the quality of its work, which is ‘as good as any magic circle firm’, according to Chambers UK. Bristol is also becoming a legal hub, so people from London are attracted to the area and they get a better work/life balance.

A lot of our lawyers have relocated from London, so it’s a well-trodden path for candidates to make the move. When they move to us, we help them by providing the assistance of a relocation agent.

While commuting in London can often mean two hours a day on crowded public transport, nearly 50% of Burges Salmon employees either walk or cycle to work. There’s also a ferry service for commuters. This means commuting could be a half-hour walk door-to-door. Nearly two years after joining the firm, one of our people commented: “The novelty of having my evenings free just never gets old!”

It’s not just the relaxed commute and improved work/life balance that is drawing people to the city. If you’ve ever visited Bristol, you’ll know that it’s a great place for anyone who likes their food. There are a huge number of different restaurants to choose from and there are new places opening all of the time.

Bristol is famous for its cider and it’s fantastic for beer lovers, too. There are many great pubs all across the city and surrounding countryside. We’re quite spoilt at Burges Salmon, as we have a lot of different options within walking distance of the office, which are ideal for Friday after-work drinks. Some favourites include Moor Brewery, Wild Beer Co and the Grain Barge.

The countryside is easily accessible and just a short journey out of the city you will find yourself in some amazing places such as the Mendip Hills (where our running club competes in Uphill to Wells), the Cotswolds or Westonbirt Arboretum. Bath is only ten minutes by train and many National Trust estates are also close by.

There are always things to do in Bristol. There are some iconic sites, such as Clifton Suspension Bridge, SS Great Britain and The Matthew. You may also wish to visit the Harbourside, Cabot Tower, Clifton Downs Observatory or Bristol Zoo, as well as Clifton Village, Cabot Circus and Cribbs Causeway for shopping. Big events also include the Bristol International Balloon Fiesta, Bristol Harbour Festival, as well as West End theatre shows (that have come to Bristol’s theatres), exhibitions (such as Banksy) and live music.

We are noting a marked increase in interest from candidates who are looking to relocate away from London and Bristol is one of the cities most in demand. Angela’s glowing report on life in Bristol and the quality of work makes it easy to see why.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account

by

Are law firms missing the point by obsessing over NQ retention rates?

Every retention season is met with a frenzy of articles in the legal press setting out what percentage of each firm’s trainees are being kept on as NQ solicitors. The firms with the highest rates trumpet their success to show why candidates should choose to train with them rather than their competitors. The poor performers try to bury the bad news and hope no one notices. But are firms right to obsess over this or are they missing the point?

The battle for the brightest and best law graduates is relentless. That’s why law firms take such great pains to promote not just the quality of their training, but the fact that they aim to retain all of their trainee solicitors upon qualification.

This is perfectly noble and given the huge sums that law firms spend on taking an aspiring lawyer from graduation through to qualification, it makes sense.

However, achieving a 100% retention rate when you’re a law firm that recruits 20+ trainee solicitors a year is extremely rare. Large commercial law firms tend to achieve retention rates of between 70% – 90%.

When you consider that the length of time between the date upon which a training contract is offered to a final year law student and their date of qualification is often three and sometimes as much as four years, it’s hardly surprising that law firms struggle to achieve retention rates of 90% on a consistent basis.

For final seat trainees, retention season (usually March or September) is a nerve-wracking time. Will the department they are looking to join have an NQ vacancy? How many other trainees might apply for that role? Did they impress the head of department when training in that seat? Was that too long ago? So many questions, so much uncertainty. Solicitors don’t like uncertainty!

If you don’t like uncertainty (and as a lawyer we’re guessing you may be on the risk-averse side of things), are you better off securing a training contract with a smaller law firm? Is there a correlation between the number of trainees a firm takes on and their retention rates?

For those who would prefer to avoid the anxiety leading up to qualification, we are sorry to report that there is no correlation at all.

We looked at the retention rates of a sample group of 26 top 100 UK and US law firms during 2016, 2017 and 2018 and found that:

  • Firms that took on 1 – 20 trainee solicitors a year retained 81% on average
  • Firms that took on 21 – 50 trainee solicitors a year retained 84% on average
  • Firms that took on 51+ trainee solicitors a year retained 83% on average

We then examined whether there was a difference between the retention rates achieved by the UK and US law firms in the same sample group and again found no real distinction: the UK firms retained 83% on average and the US firm retained 85%.

This doesn’t offer much guidance to trainees. But do they need it? Are firms right to focus so much on their retention rates as a means of attracting the best students?

We don’t think so. Whether or not they’re going to be retained as NQ solicitors is clearly important to aspiring lawyers, but it’s not quite as important as firms might think.

In the trainee and NQ survey we carried out earlier in the year, we asked participants: “What was more important to you: staying with your training firm as an NQ solicitor or qualifying into your preferred practice area?”

Only 5.3% said staying with the firm was more important, 22.2% gave them equal importance and an overwhelming 72.5% said qualifying into their preferred practice area was more important.

The message from trainees is that cast-iron certainty of a job with their training firm is not top of their list. What they want is good training, to be paid well and to pursue their career in their chosen practice area.

There’s nothing wrong with having a 70% retention rate if the 30% feel like they have been well looked after, have received good training and have gone onto secure an NQ role, whether in house or in another law firm, practising the area of law they enjoy.

The new Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) being introduced in 2021 is going to change how people enter the profession and the traditional training contract will no longer be a prerequisite to qualifying as a solicitor.

The impact of this is something we are going to write about in a future blog, but we believe it may have a dramatic effect on the way firms recruit and train junior staff. It is quite possible we will end up with a similar system to the accountancy profession where firms take on large numbers of student lawyers with little or no expectation (from either the students or the firm) that they will be kept on after qualification. If that is the case, retention rates will be a thing of the past.

In the meantime, most trainees qualifying in spring 2019 will be nervously wondering what the future holds for them and where their future lies.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account

by

Linklaters is last and least as stragglers announce autumn retentions

It was a mixed bag for the magic circle and top US law firms as the final autumn retention rates were announced.

Linklaters was the last of the magic circle firms to announce its autumn 2018 retentions and it was a case of last and least – its 73% score was lower than all of its magic circle rivals. The Silk Street giant is retaining 43 of its 59 qualifiers, although it should be pointed out that it takes on more trainees than any other firm in the City. This is a dip from its recent excellent returns of 84%, 84% and 86% in the last three rounds. NQs will start on around £90,000 (depending on bonus). Graduate recruitment partner Richard Hodgson seemed happy enough though, commenting: “We are pleased to once again retain a good number of quality lawyers … I look forward to seeing their careers progress as they pursue exciting opportunities within a best in class and globally minded firm.”

Freshfields scored 83% (34 out of 41) to put it in the middle of the magic circle pack, slightly ahead of Allen & Overy’s 37 out of 46 (80%). Freshfields’ new NQ solicitors will be on £85,000 per annum. In our earlier autumn retention rate blog, we reported Slaughter and May’s excellent 86% (32 from 37) and Clifford Chance’s less stellar 77% (36 from 47). A mixed bag then for those at the proverbial top of the legal tree.

Looking now at the silver circle, Macfarlanes has notched a more than acceptable 91%, with 21 out of 23 moving up to NQ status. Meanwhile, Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner has a retention rate of 79% (15 out of 19), which is not outstanding, but is a marked improvement on its spring number of 64%. All but two will be based in London, with one of the new cohorts qualifying into the firm’s Hong Kong real estate team and another into its Frankfurt finance team.

Herbert Smith Freehills has achieved a creditable 82%, with 31 out of 38 staying put. This trails behind Ashurst’s outstanding 90%, with all but two of its 21 qualifiers securing positions as NQ solicitors. The firm’s training principal, Sarah Sivyour, said the results “reinforce the firm’s commitment to attracting, supporting and developing the best people from the widest talent pool.” Good as its results were, Ashurst failed to match the performance of fellow silver circle firm Travers Smith, who achieved a perfect 21 out of 21 as we reported in our early autumn blog.

Elsewhere, Norton Rose Fulbright offered 28 out 31 trainee solicitors NQ positions this autumn, all of whom accepted (a score of 90%). This is a welcome (and impressive) hike from its unspectacular spring showing of 62%. Stephenson Harwoodmatched this 90%, albeit from a lower number, with nine of its trainees staying with the firm. All will be based in London apart from one NQ solicitor who will join the firm’s Shanghai office.

Other firms to have announced their autumn results include CMS, who had 72 trainees qualifying this autumn. Of these, 55 will continue with the firm, 36 of whom will be based in London, six in Edinburgh, six in Sheffield, three in Aberdeen and two each in Glasgow and Bristol. The London-based NQs will start on £70,000 compared to their counterparts in Bristol, who will be on £50,000 and those in Scotland on £40,000. The firm’s Manchester NQs will earn £42,000 and those in Sheffield, £41,000.

Other high performers were RPC, who are keeping 14 of 17 (82%), Fieldfisher, 11 out of 13 (85%), and Clyde & Co, 38 out of 46 (83%). Of these, 30 of Clyde & Co’s newbies will be based in London with the rest spread between Manchester, Guildford, Newcastle, Hong Kong, San Francisco and Singapore. Charles Russell Speechlys, meanwhile, topped all these excellent scores with an even better one of its own – 88% (23 out of 26).

Of the late announcing US firms, Reed Smith is keeping on 10 out of 13 of its London-qualifying trainees (77%), a drop from its 86% this time last year. They will start on £75,000 per annum. Over at White & Case, 21 of its 25 qualifiers are staying put (84%), all of whom will start at a not-to-be-sniffed-at £105,000. This ranks them alongside US rivals Shearman & Sterling and £3,500 ahead of their counterparts at Sullivan & Cromwell.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account

by

Establishing a law firm’s culture is crucial when making a move at NQ to 2 PQE

How important is a law firm’s culture when choosing which firm to join as an NQ? And how do you even go about determining what that culture is and whether it is a good fit for you?

I read recently that Hogan Lovells has installed an indoor putting green in its new Birmingham office. The “Gallimore Green” has been named in homage to one of its partners, Michael Gallimore, who is by all accounts a bit of a golf nut.

The workspace has other facilities too, such as a coffee house, gym and table tennis area. It sounds less like solicitors’ office and more like a We Work-style co-working space. Michael Gallimore said of it: “We want to provide our people with challenging and exciting client work, a supportive and ambitious culture, and a first-class working environment with excellent amenities.”

It brings to mind Richard Branson’s quote: “Create the kind of workplace and company culture that will attract great talent.”

That’s clearly Hogan Lovells’ thinking, as it is for many law firms. Firms talk a lot about their culture when recruiting staff, with phrases such a “nurturing”, “supportive” and “collegiate” never very far away.

In my experience, one of the most important things a candidate can do is look beyond what a firm says its culture is and more at how its culture is demonstrated. I had this in mind recently when I stumbled upon the website of a law firm in the south east (whose identity I won’t reveal) that featured standard issue profile shots of all the staff except the managing partner, who for some reason appeared in a long, curly wig, and a moustache and nose set in the style of Groucho Marx. I couldn’t work out if this was an attempt to show the firm’s sense of fun and informal style or a wind up perpetrated by the IT team. Either way, when I went back to the website to show a colleague, the picture had been replaced with a ‘normal’ profile shot matching all the others.

Then I read about Proximity law firm in Australia on Roll on Friday under the heading ‘Bonkers Law Firm Website’. The article refers to the fact that Proximity’s website explains how they’ve worked out “how to do things differently” and exist “at the pointy end” (whatever that means). Their profile pics alternate between the usual suited and booted look and the same people dressed for their hobbies: snowboarding, cycling, yoga, etc. Yes, it is a bit cheesy, but everyone is smiling, and you get a sense of what the firm must be like to work for.

I would still take this with a pinch of salt though. I always advise candidates thinking of joining a new firm to do two things:

  • Establish what the firm’s culture is really like.
  • Work out if that culture is a good fit for their own values and what they want in their working life.

Let’s look at these two aspects in more detail.

How do you establish what a law firm’s culture is?

You can do this by finding out what behaviour is expected and encouraged of its staff, and what behaviour is tolerated.

Despite what some firms say, many firms encourage individual effort over teamwork, rivalry between colleagues rather than harmony, the meeting of financial targets over staff wellbeing, disrespect towards clients ahead of relationship building.

Similarly, some firms give more lassitude towards “big-hitter” fee earners in relation to their behaviour, treat non-fee earners or junior staff with less respect than fee earners or senior staff, and take a cavalier attitude towards billing chargeable time to certain clients.

In contrast, it will be the culture at some firms to show genuine concern for their clients, the advice they give them and how much they charge for it. In addition, there will be mutual respect between colleagues at all levels within the firm, and care from the management for the health and welfare of their staff.

You can find out about these things by speaking to people who work at the firm or who used to work at the firm and by carrying out research online. You can glean a lot too from the interview process and your impressions when you are shown around the firm.

Work out what you want

While it’s true that this generation of junior professionals is more conscious of the importance of getting the right work/life balance, I am still surprised by how many NQs I speak to who haven’t thought through what they want from their career. You won’t know if you are a match unless you know what your priorities are in terms of culture and values.

What type of working environment do you want and what relationships do you expect to have with colleagues? Everyone is different; some people thrive in a highly competitive environment with a ‘macho’ work culture, other prefer a high degree of teamwork and sociability. Consider also the work/life balance you are comfortable with and how much time you want to see friends or family or to pursue your hobbies.

The important thing is to determine if the firm is a good fit for you rather than whether you could tolerate or make a go of it.

If you would like to take the next step in your legal career, or if you are looking to hire solicitors at NQ to 2 PQE, register now with NQ Solicitors or call 020 3709 9165 to find out more.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account

by

NQ survey results spark spirited online discussions about law firms’ duties to NQs

The survey of 350+ trainee and newly qualified solicitors we conducted this summer received plenty of attention in the legal press and generated a surge in sign-ups by junior lawyers on our platform. In this blog, we look at the reaction to the results of our survey and ponder whether law firms are missing the bigger picture in their training programmes.

As it’s our business to know which junior lawyers might be on the move and who might be hiring, we wanted to know what law firms do to help those trainee solicitors who are, for whatever reason, moving upon qualification. So, we designed a survey to discover more about what (if any) support final seat trainees receive if they are looking for a new role upon qualification.

Some of our key findings were:

  • 72% of trainee and NQ solicitors felt that their firm should have provided support to final seat trainees who were not being kept on upon qualification.
  • 53% said that their law firm offered no support at all to trainee solicitors who did not secure an NQ position.
  • Only 30% of trainee solicitors had/have a solid back-up plan if they don’t secure a position as an NQ solicitor at their training firm.

After sharing our results with the legal press, the Law Society Gazette responded with an article under the title ‘Trainees ask for more support as retention season begins’. The article quotes Adele Edwin Lamerton, Chair of The Junior Lawyers Division of the Law Society, which has previously called on law firms to give trainee solicitors sufficient notice on whether or not they intend to hire them.

She says in the article: “Although firms cannot always control whether or not they keep trainees on, they can in most cases control how soon they let their trainees know about their future with the firm. To assist qualifying trainees, firms should consider holding exit interviews to discuss next steps and allowing them time off to attend interviews.”

Legal Cheek’s response to our findings, in its article entitled ‘Law firms are failing to support qualifying trainees who aren’t kept on’, included testimony we received from an NQ solicitor who received no support at all after being told by a large commercial law firm that she would not be offered an NQ position.

“This made me feel pretty unappreciated after working very hard for two years, and worried about finding a suitable position elsewhere,” she said. “It made me feel quite dispensable although I was still working six days each week as I was so busy. They wanted me to continue to work hard but for no purpose from my perspective other than to learn as much as possible before I left, which is why I did it. I found the firm surprisingly ruthless given their size and history.”

Unsurprisingly, these articles prompted some strongly expressed views in the comments sections of both publications.

If you read the comments, you’ll quickly realise that not everyone is sympathetic to the plight of aspiring lawyers who are required to leave their training firm upon qualification. There are quite a few accusations of “snowflakery”, etc.

However, both articles generated comments that were much more sympathetic towards those trainee solicitors who are not offered positions as NQ solicitors. Those on this side of the argument believe that law firms have an obligation to assist and support those who are moving onto pastures new.

So, who’s right?

On one side, you could argue that trainee solicitors should know that the fixed term training contract they signed is exactly that, and certainly no guarantee of a permanent position as an NQ solicitor. In addition, those who have been offered a training contract by a large City law firm while still at university, won’t have been treated too shabbily during the process. In addition to the handsome salary that they will have been paid during their training, (sometimes more than £50,000 during the second year of their training contract), some will also have benefitted from a sizeable maintenance allowance/grant while completing their sponsored LPC.

In addition, if at this stage in their career, a young professional is forced to show a bit of initiative and to plough their own furrow, isn’t that going to be what’s best for them in the long run? The legal sector can be pretty unforgiving and relentless, don’t we want legal professionals to be robust individuals?

On the flip side you could argue that, while trainee solicitors will know that their training contract has a fixed end date, they were attracted to apply for a training contract because their firm told them they will move heaven and earth to retain every trainee.

Yes, they may well have been paid handsomely as a trainee solicitor, but it’s not exactly a one-way street. Let’s not forget the long hours that they will have put in for two years, and the huge sums of money that they will have generated for their training firm (as their time is often charged out at more than £200 per hour).

And, while we’re discussing long hours, how exactly are those who are moving on supposed to find a new job while they’re still being asked to give blood, sweat and tears during the final few months of their training?

Lastly, let’s not forget that it may well be the first time in a young professional’s life that he or she will have faced rejection. If you secured straight As and ‘A’ Level, got into your first-choice university and secured a training contract with the law firm you always dreamt of working for, facing rejection from that firm is going to be a bitter pill to swallow. Is this not the time when that individual requires support the most?

The bigger picture

We think there is a bigger picture that law firms are missing in all this and it’s one we made in our earlier blog:

“Surely many of the skills trainees claim to want help with are ones they should have acquired as part of their training programme? If their training is really as rounded as firms claim, surely NQs will have the confidence and know-how they need to land their next role. Soft skills such as making a good impression at interview, the ability to network (online in the case of LinkedIn) are surely ones they should have already acquired. Are some firms letting down all their trainee solicitors by not giving quite the rounded training they claim?”

Our next survey will be asking firms about these issues. What duty do they think they owe to their trainees? Do they agree that the skills referred to are ones they should be acquiring anyway and will need if they are to progress within the firm, hopefully to partnership? To what extent do they offer training to acquire these skills or are planning to do so?

The survey results promise to be interesting and we will reveal them to you once they come in. Watch this space.

Create a Candidate Profile Activate a Hirer Account