Law Society to students: legal career may be too risky

  • Print
  • Comments (78)

Readers' comments (78)

  • There are a lot of law students whining about not being able to secure a TC.
    It's high risk but students know that before they pay for the courses.
    It's the responsibility of the student to determine whether he or she wants to take the risk.
    If I had to decide whether to self fund the LPC today then, of course, I wouldn't do it. It's far too risky. Why would I self fund a course which will more than likely lead to a low paid paralegal job at best?
    However every student has to decide for him/herself.
    If one takes a risk then don't complain if that risk is realised.
    Stop whining and take responsibility for your own risk taking!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The problem is the Training Contract. It should be abolished. If a person is good enough to get a degree and pass LPC then they should be allowed to set up their oewn business and practice law. The cost of LPC eliminates less wealthy students from the legal profession, the ridiculous bias of selection for Training Contracts then eliminates people from working class backgrounds from the profession. The result? A profession that continues to be the same people from the same elite backgrounds ad inifinitum. Let legal services be a career open to anyone who is competent and let them have to compete in the same way that other service providers have to.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To C E Shepherd
    You miss the point.
    The heart of the problem is that there are too many students chasing too few jobs.
    The solution is not to increase the number of people working in law but to stop people taking silly risks and paying for the LPC themselves.
    Increasing the number of people working in the business does not solve the issue of no jobs.
    What's the point of encouraging people to enter an industry where there is no demand?
    By the way the cost of the LPC does not deter the best candidates because the best candidates are sponsored.
    If you are not sponsored then you shouldn't be doing the LPC because your applications for a training contract have been rejected.
    This problem has been created by desperate student self funding the LPC.
    Solving self funding of the LPC would ensure that supply roughly equals demand. Problem solved.
    In the teaching and medical profession they only take the numbers they need and that's why doctors are not sat around twiddling their thumbs.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • LPC and CPE (GDL) become invalid after 7 years. So if you don't get a TC in this time your are out.....this is not well known and not publicised by the Law Society or ILEX. I know I got caught.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To the above post, there is nothing you can do to change supply demand fundamentals.
    The bottom line is there are too many students which means regardless of how hard they all try many of them must fail.
    That's life. As time goes by it will get even harder because every year another load of students are pumped out of the College of Law factory.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Re: Anonymous in response to C E Shepherd
    I agree that the main problem is one of over-supply. However, I would question your assertion that the 'best candidates get sponsorship'. From my own observations and those I know in the profession those from less affluent backgrounds are far less likely to get sponsorship. Also, (and this is not exclusive to law) the enormous competition for training means that those whose families can subsidize unpaid internships and extra-currics stand a much greater chance of gaining said sponsorship.
    Yes, large numbers of students will be rejected, but I suspect that the proportion of less affluent students in that category who actually had the ability to make very able lawyers is growing.
    There is also the matter of institutions being less than candid about the chances of these students. I'm sure this will trigger scoffing, but even those with the requisite intelligence from less affluent backgrounds sometimes do not have the experience and understanding to make a detailed assessment of their chances. I think people underestimate the power of growing up in certain social/economic conditions and how this impacts on the potential candidate.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Jeremy Peters.
    Very true. However that is just a fact of life.
    People from poorer backgrounds do not have access to important information concerning careers.
    This will not change and does not detract from the point that students need to be saved from themselves.
    The problem is going to be compounded by increases in tuition fees.
    The only real benefit to the increase in tution fees is that hopefully it will prompt students to stop and think!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • CE Shepherd - you seem to be suggesting that people who pass the LPC should be admitted to the Roll and allowed to set up shop as Solicitors on their own, without the need for a Training Contract or any experience of practising law.
    Your idea is unworkable for a number of reasons, as others have pointed out.
    In addition I do not beleive that any PI insurer would seriously contemplate offering insurance in these circumstances.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page |

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (78)