Working Life

Are you thinking of becoming a corporate lawyer on qualification? If so, here’s what you need to know.

Tell someone you are a corporate lawyer and they are likely to look at you either with awe or pity, but rarely indifference. Depending on your point of view, corporate lawyers are either the glamourous rock stars of the profession or its pitiful drudges, chained to their desks when everyone else is in the pub.

The perception seems to be that being a corporate lawyer is some kind of trade-off. As Lucy Kellaway put it in the Financial Times: “Do you really want to be a corporate lawyer? You will earn a lot of money. You will work with bright people. But survey after survey shows that City solicitors are the least happy professionals around. They work the whole time.”

Having spoken to countless corporate lawyers at all levels over the years, it is simply not true to say they are all unhappy. Yes, hard work is a prerequisite for success, there’s no escaping that. But they take on interesting, varied work often involving high-profile transactions that cross continents and keep the world (or at least the business world) turning. As one Freshfields corporate trainee put it: “My experience is that when the hours are long, the work is often more exciting.”

Is corporate law for you? That depends on the type of person you are and what motivates you, and we’ll get to that. First though, let’s set out the type of work you can expect to do as a corporate lawyer in the UK.

In its broadest sense corporate law covers everything from company advisory work to multi-jurisdictional transactions. It includes raising finance, issuing shares in public companies and buying and selling businesses. In short, it envelops a huge range of legal activity and no two matters you work on will be the same.

In most big law firms corporate law is the powerhouse department. As Chambers Student says of the hugely profitable magic circle firms: “The work is heavily focused on corporate and finance: these departments stand at the heart of the firm overseeing multibillion-pound transactions. Teams like employment, tax and IP often play a supportive, advisory role in facilitating these transactions.”

So, what do you need in order to succeed as a corporate lawyer:

1. Energy

There’s no hiding from the fact that the hours are long, often very long. A recent survey in Legal Cheek has revealed how much time, on average, trainees and junior lawyers at large City firms spend at work each day. Kirkland & Ellis tops the list at 12 hours 28 minutes per day, with magic circle firms Clifford Chance (11 hrs 44 minutes) and Freshfields (11 hrs 37 minutes) not far behind. You could safely bet that corporate lawyers at these firms will have been among the hardest workers. “Pulling an all-nighter” is unlikely to be a rare occurrence.

2. Management and team working skills

Large corporate deals often require vast teams of specialised lawyers, each dealing with a small part of the big picture be it tax, pensions, employment, etc. Someone needs to manage these teams and draw together all the different strands. Keeping all those balls in the air is the role of the corporate lawyer running the show.

3. Organisational skills and attention to deal

Corporate law requires both the ability to see the big picture and an aptitude for close attention to detail so that no important points are missed. That’s why the hours are so long and the job so demanding. Being organised and able to stay on top of things is crucial

4. Wide legal knowledge and the ability to think innovatively

Corporate deals can be endlessly complex, especially when they cross jurisdictions. A broad legal knowledge is a must, as is the ability to come up with innovative solutions to difficult problems. There is rarely a roadmap to follow and you will often find yourself having to work with colleagues and clients to overcome what may seem at first like insurmountable barriers.

5. Confidence and the ability to win clients

As we’ve said, corporate deals bring in big bucks and that means competing for business in pitches and beauty parades. Having the charm and persuasive skills to win work is a rare skill and one that will set you on the fast track to partnership.

If you believe you have what it takes to succeed as a corporate lawyer, you may also like to consider the likely impact of Brexit on corporate work and your career prospects? Like everything else Brexit related, there is no clear answer to this, but we look at it in more detail in our recent blog, With Brexit looming, should you stay in law? And if so, which field should you specialise in?

In the meantime, if you are thinking about a career in corporate law post qualification, please go to NQSolicitors.com to see find out opportunities are available.

After a few years in the doldrums, are we on the cusp of a new golden age for employment lawyers? The answer is a resounding ‘yes’ if the latest employment tribunal figures are anything to go by. In the first of a series of blogs looking at different areas of law, we look at what to expect if you choose to qualify into employment law.

Statistics released recently by the Ministry of Justice show that employment tribunal claims have more than doubled since the abolition of tribunal fees in July.

This is great news for employment lawyers. The number of claims plummeted after fees were introduced in July 2013, with some estimates saying they were down by as much as 70%. The knock-on effect for employment lawyers has been stark. While tribunal work usually represents only part of an employment lawyer’s workload, the reduction in tribunal work has hit the sector hard. As a result, we have seen a dramatic fall in the demand for employment lawyers over the past few years.

That’s a shame as the impression we get from employment lawyers we’ve worked with is that it is one of the more rewarding areas in which to specialise.

We believe that the recent changes to tribunal fees, combined with the impact of Brexit will mean that employment departments will come increasingly to the fore in the years ahead.

If you are considering making your career in employment law, what can you expect?

1. Variety

Most employment lawyers act for both employees and employers. (This isn’t always the case but lawyers who sit on only one side of the fence tend to be the exception rather than the rule). As a result, there’s plenty of variety and you can expect your legal skills to be stretched in any number of ways.

In most practices this will include litigation, representing employers and employees. Apart from needing to be skilled in dispute work, employment lawyers will also get involved in drafting and negotiating contracts of employment and settlement agreements, preparing handbooks and policies, and helping out their commercial colleagues on acquisitions and disposals.

2. It’s fast-paced

The nature of the work means that you can never be entirely sure what your day holds when you step into the office in the morning. If a client wants advice about a dismissal or disciplinary matter, for example, you may have to drop everything and respond immediately. Much of the work is time-critical and an ability to respond promptly is a must.

3. It is people orientated

Employment law issues can get personal and strong people skills are essential. When acting for employees you will need to gain their trust quickly at what is often a very stressful time. You will have to be able to empathise with them and get to the bottom of their motivations. You will also need to be able to explain complicated legal points in a clear and concise way.

When you act for employers, you will most probably have plenty of contact with your clients as they are likely to require regular advice. You will need to be able to build relationships and get to know their business and how it operates.

4. It’s constantly changing

Employment law never stands still and there are always new laws and cases to keep on top of. The past few months has seen a host of decisions surrounding the gig economy, for example, as the law tries to keep pace with changing working practices.

Most successful employment lawyers love their specialist field and spend much of their time keeping up to date and blogging about the latest changes. In addition, every change of government brings with it a host of new laws relating to employment so it’s an area that never stands still.

5. You need to know the law, and be able to apply it. 

Knowing the law is important, of course, but so is being able to apply it. Much of your time will be spent giving real-world, commercial advice that clients can rely on. You’ll be expected to use your judgment and be practical. Employment lawyers can’t just hide behind what the law says, it’s the application of the law that matters. As part of this, you may be expected to go outside the strict parameters of employment law and have some idea about tax, pension, even immigration law, in order to give 360-degree advice.

According to Winston Churchill, “We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us.” With this in mind, we look at what a firm’s layout says about its culture and how important it is when choosing your next firm.

I read recently that 19% of the top 100 law firms have open plan offices. That compares to 10% five years ago and shows the direction in which law firms are headed. There is a definite trend towards open plan.

There is little doubt that cost is a key driver, especially for larger firms. The world’s largest commercial real estate consultancy CBRE estimates that, on average, firms using open plan occupy 40% less space and pay 35% less in property costs per fee earner than firms that operate on a cellular basis. For this reason alone, we expect more firms to adopt open plan in the near future.

Cost is only part of the story though. There are other benefits of having an open plan workspace, though there are downsides, too.

Let’s take a look at what these are. How you perceive them may well influence your choice of firm next time you move jobs.

The benefits of an open plan working environment

1. It reflects the firm’s culture

Most of the law firms we speak to are afraid of living up to the stereotype of being old fashioned. An open plan environment, which is a radical break from the traditional cellular layout, is the most obvious clue that a firm is moving with the times.

With recruitment of the best young trainees and lawyers high on most firm’s list of priorities, this matters. An open plan office says to the world we’re modern, we’re friendly and we work as a team. Most importantly, it shows that the firm is non-hierarchical. Partners become visible and approachable, rather than being hidden behind closed doors.

2. It is easier to share knowledge

Learning from more experienced colleagues is a critical part of a young lawyer’s growth. They can see how partners and senior colleagues go about their day-to-day work, and deal with difficult clients and lawyers on the other side.

It is also easier for young lawyers to ask questions of colleagues at opportune moments or for team members to hold impromptu meetings to discuss something they are working jointly.

3. Partners have a better idea what is going on

Partners are better able to gauge how a junior lawyer is coping with their workload and when to step in to offer support. They also get a clearer idea of how team members interact with each other and what contribution everyone is making.

4. It generates a sense of camaraderie

It has become a bit of a cliché for firms to talk about their ‘collegiate’ atmosphere. Cliché or not, having a happy workforce with everyone pulling in the same direction is one of the biggest challenges for large firms.

Open plan offices foster a co-operative atmosphere and plenty of human interaction. By seeing everyone around you, including partners, working hard and enjoying what they do, you are likely to be far more productive and committed.

Also, new recruits find it easier to get to know their colleagues and are integrated into the firm more quickly.

5. Flexibility

Open plan space is much more flexible than the traditional cellular layout. It is easier to move teams around or bring groups together for specific projects. Plus, seating arrangements can be freshened up as and when necessary.

The downsides of an open plan environment

1. It’s noisier and less private

Legal work is often complex and requires high levels of concentration. Sometimes you need to close the door and be free from distractions. Open plan advocates will say most offices set aside private areas for this type of work, but the fact is some lawyers prefer to work in relative peace all the time. Also, some people don’t like speaking on the phone when others can listen in.

2. Confidentiality

It’s a bedrock of the profession that client matters remain confidential. Many lawyers fear that by working in an open plan office there is a risk that private information will leak out.

3. Prestige

Most partners are rightly proud of their status and some feel that this should be recognised by being afforded a private room, preferably with a big window and a suitably impressive view. They want junior staff to aspire to their lofty heights and believe it will encourage them to work harder.

While most observers expect the number of law firms operating in an open plan environment to continue to grow, it is clear that there are many traditionalists who remain steadfastly resistant to change.

Depending on your own preference, it should be a factor when choosing your next firm.

If you are considering moving firm as an NQ-2 PQE Solicitor, please go to NQSolicitors.com now.

One of the great advantages of running on an online recruitment platform is being able to generate data about candidates. I suppose in the online dating world it would be the equivalent of working out how many of your clients are into gothic romance novels or extreme ironing (yes, it really is a thing – apparently).

NQ Solicitors’ stats may not be as quirky, but in their own way are just as fascinating.

A recent set of statistics (shown on the graphs below) makes interesting reading for firms looking to hire solicitors at NQ to 2 PQE. The data is taken from the 400+ final seat trainees and NQs who have registered on nqsolicitors.com since the platform was launched in November 2016.

By way of background, when candidates register with us they are asked a series of questions about their academic record and legal experience to date. But, due to the fact that NQSolicitors uses a unique two-way matching process, we also ask candidates about their work preferences in relation to the type of firm they want to work for, their preferred department, their minimum salary and their preferred location.

As you can see from the first graph, 90% of final seat trainees and NQs who trained in London are unwilling to relocate and only 7% would consider locating. Just 3% actively want to relocate away from the capital.

While very few of you will be surprised to hear that London acts as a magnet for young professionals, it’s fascinating to juxtapose these figures with the comparable statistics for regional trainees and NQs. Only 13% of candidates who trained in the regions are unwilling to relocate, with 58% willing to relocate and 29% actively looking to relocate.

What conclusions can hirers draw from these statistics?

Two obvious conclusions are as follows:

1. Firms located in the regions are far less likely to recruit junior lawyers from London than from outside; and

2. City law firms can have rich pickings from both inside and outside the capital.

So, on the face of it, London-based firms are at a distinct advantage when it comes to the recruitment market for NQ Solicitors. But do large City firms really see it this way?

Regional firms don’t seem to feel disadvantaged by point 1, because they are more than happy to recruit lawyers who have trained in the regions. Rather, point 1 is more of a concern to City firms who are looking to recruit junior lawyers for their lower cost regional outposts, because their preference, rightly or wrongly, is for NQs who have been ‘City’ trained.

This preference for ‘City’ trained NQs also renders point 2 irrelevant to City law firms.

These statistics indicate that a change of mindset may be needed by some City firms if they are to recruit successfully for their regional offices and take advantage of London’s pulling power when recruiting in the capital.

From our point of view, the data we gather when candidates register with our platform gives us a much broader view of the market for NQ solicitors than is available to most recruitment companies.

It also allows us to identify precisely, and at the outset, what candidates’ geographical preferences are. Few things are more frustrating for hirers than candidates being pushed into an interview by a recruiter only to find that they don’t want to relocate to where you are, or that they actively want to relocate away from where you are.

Data is starting to play a big part in recruitment, as we wrote about in our recent blog, How the correct use of big data can help law firms find the best NQ solicitors. The important thing is to gather the right data and then use it to inform the way you work in order to match candidates with hirers.

Watch this space for more analysis from us on the NQ Solicitor recruitment market. (Note: as things stand we have no plans to ask candidates if they are into extreme ironing).

The three-way tie-up between CMS, Nabarro and Olswang announced in October is the latest in a series of mergers to have hit the London legal market in recent years. We look at the impact of the merger on the firms’ trainee solicitors and their chances of securing newly qualified positions.

The merger of CMS, Nabarro and Olswang has created, in their words, a “new City powerhouse”. The combined firm will become the world’s sixth-largest law firm by headcount and the sixth largest by revenue in the UK.

Like all mergers, it has been followed by spin from the firm about what great news the merger is for clients and “our people”.

The first sign of the new firm living up to that is its confirmation that it will honour training contract offers when the three firms merge. This is clearly great news for those trainees.

What is less clear, of course, is how the merger will affect the quality of training experienced by the firms’ existing trainees and their chances of securing an NQ position at the end of their training contracts.

Looking first at how the merger may influence the chances of trainees being kept on as NQs, a starting point is to look at retention rates at each of the three firms over the past few years. This can be seen in the table below and makes interesting reading.

CMS, NABARRO & OLSWANG RETENTION RATES (2014 – 2016)

CMS Retention Rate

• 2014 63/89 (71%)
• 2015 36/55 (65%)
• 2016 38/56 (68%)

Nabarro Retention Rate

• 2014 21/24 (88%)
• 2015 19/22 (86%)
• 2016 23/27 (85%)

Olswang Retention Rate

• 2014 14/16 (88%)
• 2015 12/18 (67%)
• 2016 6/8 (75%)

As the table shows, CMS’s retention figures are quite low compared to its merger partners, ranging between 65% and 71%. By contrast, Nabarro has had a consistently high retention rate of between 85% and 88% over the past three years. Olswang’s retention rate has fluctuated wildly between 67% and 88%, though it would be foolhardy to draw too many conclusions from such a small sample size (especially in 2016).

RECENT MERGERS

As a clue to the future, it is instructive to look at how trainees have been affected by other recent mergers. In the two years before their merger with Gowling, Wragge Lawrence Graham kept on 77% and 72% of trainees respectively. In 2016, the first year since they joined forces, Gowling WLG retained 74% of trainees. In other words, no real change.

Again, we should warn against drawing many conclusions from this data, as the merger involved a tie-up between a UK and Canadian law firm with no real presence in the UK prior to the merger.

The 2014 merger between Charles Russell and Speechly Bircham may, therefore, be a more accurate indicator, and the figures paint a more encouraging picture. Charles Russell Speechlys retained 73% of its trainees in 2015 and 72% this year, compared to just 63% (Charles Russell) and 69% (Speechly Bircham) in the year prior to the merger. This is only a modest uplift, but reassuring nonetheless.

It is difficult to draw cast iron conclusions, but a tentative one is that the CMS merger could be good news for CMS trainees, neutral for Olswang trainees and possibly less good news for Nabarro trainees.

Turning now to the bigger picture, what effect can a merger have on an individual’s training and long-term opportunities?

In an article in The Lawyer, Andrew Leaitherland, managing partner at DWF, is quoted as saying that a merger presents significant benefits and advantages. “The merged firm may have greater resources and this can manifest in many ways: larger training budgets mean more opportunities for learning and development; more offices may mean opportunities for relocation; and a widening of service lines may provide greater scope to work in different practice areas,” he said. “The talented and ambitious trainee may well find that they are ideally suited to an acquisitive firm because of the career progression opportunities this presents.”

This view was supported in the article by Duncan Batchelor, graduate recruitment partner at Norton Rose Fulbright, who cited the opportunity for more client secondments and overseas seats for trainee solicitors as a result of his firm’s global growth.

THE AFFECT ON TRAINEES

Trainees at a merged firm will have a host of questions they need to consider if they are offered the chance to stay on as NQs. These include:

• Will the merger change the culture of the firm and working environment?
• Are more mergers planned, and if so, how might this change the firm further?
• How will the merger affect the practice area in which the trainee wishes to work, the quality of the work and the type of clients the firm acts for?

In the article in The Lawyer, Ben Higson, graduate recruitment partner at Hogan Lovells, suggested that lawyers applying for roles at merged firms should think of the benefits and “the exciting challenges and opportunities that working for a merged firm might bring”.

Andrew Leaitherland took this further: “The savvy candidate may even want to ask about opportunities to be involved in any of the cross-firm initiatives which inevitably arise post-merger and which are designed to facilitate integration,” he said.

Only time will tell what the future holds for trainee solicitors at Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP, or ‘CMS’ as it will be known, thankfully. We for one will be watching with interest.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has recently revealed that 105 Legal Practice Course graduates have successfully applied to qualify as solicitors through ‘equivalent means’ since the scheme was launched in summer 2014, enabling them to bypass the traditional training contract (source: Legal Cheek).

This has led to some speculation that equivalent means could be the way forward for the legal sector.

While the scheme has gained some traction, and we should certainly congratulate those solicitors that have qualified via equivalent means, I personally cannot see any reason why the introduction of an alternative route to qualification alone will lead to large-scale change within the sector.

This is mainly because the existence of an alternative route, by itself, gives medium and large-scale law firms, with well-established training programmes, absolutely no reason to change.

Such organisations invest a huge amount in building highly-effective training programmes that are designed to attract the ‘brightest and best’ trainee solicitors, and an essential part of their offering is that, essentially, they guarantee that their trainee solicitors will qualify. The equivalent means route, crucially, offers no such guarantee.

Without being discourteous, I can see nothing about the equivalent means route that looks attractive from the point of view of an aspiring solicitor that is confident that he/she will secure a training contract.

Having said that, I think that the existence of an alternative route to qualification is a hugely positive development of the sector, and a boon for aspiring solicitors who, for one reason or another, have been unable to secure a training contract.

It is certainly the case that lots of extremely bright and capable individuals are lost to the sector for no other reason than they hit the legal market at the wrong time. During difficult economic times, many firms cut back on the number of training contracts they offer, and you can’t help but feel sorry for anyone who happens to be seeking a training contract in that environment.

Many of those who do miss out generally look to build on their legal experience and essentially ‘stay in the game’ by taking on paralegal work.

Those that take on paralegal work with large law firms have virtually zero chance that this engagement will lead to anything else.

However, the existence of an alternative route to qualification may well persuade smaller law firms, who have often been deterred from taking on paralegals who are clearly motivated to secure a training contract, to consider equivalent means as a viable option, as the burden falls primarily on the individual looking to qualify.

While it is encouraging that 105 aspiring solicitors have successfully qualified through equivalent means, I would like to know what percentage of applications are actually successful.

The continued growth in the number of solicitors qualifying via equivalent means will surely depend on this figure.