Nalp and IoP squabble over paralegal training claims
Share
A spat has broken out between the Institute of Paralegals (IoP) and the National Association of Licensed Paralegals (Nalp) over who has launched the country’s first national training framework.
James O’Connell
The Nalp has branded the IoP’s recent unveiling of its new Route to Qualification (RTQ) “a money spinning exercise”, claiming it was the first provider to set out a national framework more than two decades ago.
Nalp’s programme director John Stacey-Hibbert said: “We’re very concerned that the paralegal profession is being brought into disrepute by the IoP’s claims. The IoP says it’s set out professional standards for paralegals when it hasn’t - it’s operating off the back of everyone else.”
The IoP’s framework is made up of four stages. At the first stage students have to register with the IoP to become an affiliate member.
To progress to the next two stages candidates must prove that they have secured a job as a paralegal and have at least four years’ work experience.
At the fourth stage candidates have to gain a specialist paralegal qualification at Bristol Law School and upon qualification they will gain qualified paralegal status.
But the Nalp has said it already offers accredited courses and qualifications for paralegals and is the only licensed regulator in the field.
IoP chief executive James O’Connell, meanwhile, has refuted the Nalp’s suggestion that it is a “cowboy organisation”.
“It depresses us that we’re considered on the same level as the Nalp,” he said. “I don’t even want to go into a he said/she said - it’s so utterly pointless. All I’ll say is that we have a huge number of examples of where we’ve been accepted and acknowledged by the profession and government.”
View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page
Readers' comments (21)
LawyerNot2b | 2-Nov-2009 1:13 pm
Both these organisations are a joke. It's completely unnecessary for students to join either of them to get a paralegal job. Enough said.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 2-Nov-2009 1:21 pm
WHY ARE PEOPLE DOING ANY SORT OF COURSE TO BECOME A CRAPPY PARALEGAL?!! Both organisations are clearly trying to make money out of the poor little glorified filing clerks.......
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Nov-2009 11:35 am
I've been a paralegal and the last thing any firm wants is someone with more qualifications. They're completely unnecessary as the job is very procedural and can be picked up in no time.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Nov-2009 12:05 pm
I attended the National Association of Licensed Paralegals and have now secured a job as a paralegal with the Local government. They were very impressed with my qualification and thought it showed initiative to go above and beyond just obtaining a degree. The post graduate diploma is a fantastic route to take when you need to learn about the procedural side of the job so you can start working. In conclusion it is beneficial in the long run, despite anyone's opinion that qualifications are not respected, furthermore this route is more practical for those who cannot afford to pay the extreme fees for the LPC!
And finally, those who think that a paralegal's role is nothing more than a glorified filing clerk, clearly have no idea and present themselves as bitter and cynical wannabes!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 3-Nov-2009 12:23 pm
I have to agree with the above comment, as an employer I believe your staff can never be over "qualified". NALP do a sterling job and I would alway look favourably on someone with a qaulification from them.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Susan Steman F.PLL | 3-Nov-2009 12:36 pm
I love my job as a Licensed Paralegal. I am no filing clerk. I have my own clients, I go to court , I produce my own procedural papers and am well thought of in my place of work. The NALP helped me qualify 10 years ago and then I earned my Licence. I feel I am a valuable asset to my firm and the NALP gave me the confidence to achieve this. What came first the chicken or the egg? Does it matter if the training suits your requirements!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Claire Spencer | 3-Nov-2009 6:36 pm
I am a Paralegal and I believe that my training enabled me to obtain my job and understand what is required in my role. It only makes sense to get the skills that employers are looking for as not all employers have the time to train from scratch. They usually look for qualfied and competant people, as job advertisements testify. I'm aware that The National Association of Licensed Paralegals have been providing nationally recognised courses and professional membership for many years. I don't understand why the Institute of Paralegals are saying that their 'Route to Qualification' is the first and only career route for Paralegals?! They must be very out of touch not to be aware of the work that the NALP has been doing for the Paralegal profession all these years.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Ray Sal'tiel | 4-Nov-2009 1:46 pm
I have talen the NALP examinations and found them to be very good i have obtained a LLB (Hons) and their is no other way for someone to stretch the mind Solicitors/Lawyers and the Law Society like to keep a closed shop so that they can make money at each and every turn
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sally Bran | 4-Nov-2009 2:29 pm
I have done the NALP courses for the Higher Certificate and for the Fellowship Award and passed both. This helped me gain knowledge for the area of law in which I work and a basic knowledge of other areas. As for making money out of us - The NALP was my choice because it cost so little compared with the ILEX courses which I just couldn't afford and if there had not been the NALP I would never had had the opportunity of studying.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John Johnson Licensed Paralegal | 4-Nov-2009 5:34 pm
I joined the NAPL in 1992 and obtained their qualification and the License. My work now involves a mixture of acting as a locum often covering the work of a solicitor who is away for some reason, sitting as a tribunal chairman and teaching law, work that I am able to do as a direct result of the NAPL qualification. For those who try to belittle the work undertaken by members such as myself, the NAPL and those who work as paralegals all I can say is you are small minded, arrogant and very insecure. Do not knock those who try.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment