Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
GDL and working part time
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Jessica Booker" data-source="post: 29978" data-attributes="member: 2672"><p>that is assuming there are the same amount of places. I think this will generate more opportunities, but this could just create the bottle neck at the qualification point rather than the start of the career. One of the major issues that restricts the number of opportunities now is all the regulation firms have to commit to, including the two year commitment.</p><p></p><p>I think this is a much fairer process as it will combine, graduate, apprenticeship and foreign qualified lawyer routes. It will look and feel a lot more like other professional qualifications - this feels a bit like accountancy or how surveyors qualify.</p><p></p><p>The main concern I have is it will create a “trainee purgatory” - there will be plenty of people who pass the exams but don’t gain the work experience, and others who gain the work experience but don’t pass the exams. It will also lead to people being over experienced/under qualified or under experienced/over qualified for NQ roles, which could impact their employability.</p><p></p><p>My biggest issue with the new system is that there is no longer a requirement to pay people for their qualifying work experience, which in my personal opinion is a completely stupid decision from the SRA. They only did this so qualifying work experience can be gained in voluntary law clinics, particularly at university.</p><p></p><p>The GDL/LPC route was flawed in many ways. But the key reason the system had to change was that they needed to amalgamate the new apprenticeship routes that had started 4-5 years ago, along with the graduate route and qualification process for foreign qualified lawyers. Everyone was concerned about creating a two tier system, so ensuring there was a consistent benchmark for all qualifying people (including foreign qualified lawyers) made sense - and that’s how we got to the SQE.</p><p></p><p>In addition to the above, they also needed to ensure there was more quality control on the work experience piece - basically someone could coast through a training contract and actually be pretty useless and they would still qualify because it was practically impossible for firms to get rid of trainees unless they did something that warranted serious disciplinary action. This will mean firms are no longer held to ransom to sign off someone’s work experience if they haven’t actually been good enough.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Jessica Booker, post: 29978, member: 2672"] that is assuming there are the same amount of places. I think this will generate more opportunities, but this could just create the bottle neck at the qualification point rather than the start of the career. One of the major issues that restricts the number of opportunities now is all the regulation firms have to commit to, including the two year commitment. I think this is a much fairer process as it will combine, graduate, apprenticeship and foreign qualified lawyer routes. It will look and feel a lot more like other professional qualifications - this feels a bit like accountancy or how surveyors qualify. The main concern I have is it will create a “trainee purgatory” - there will be plenty of people who pass the exams but don’t gain the work experience, and others who gain the work experience but don’t pass the exams. It will also lead to people being over experienced/under qualified or under experienced/over qualified for NQ roles, which could impact their employability. My biggest issue with the new system is that there is no longer a requirement to pay people for their qualifying work experience, which in my personal opinion is a completely stupid decision from the SRA. They only did this so qualifying work experience can be gained in voluntary law clinics, particularly at university. The GDL/LPC route was flawed in many ways. But the key reason the system had to change was that they needed to amalgamate the new apprenticeship routes that had started 4-5 years ago, along with the graduate route and qualification process for foreign qualified lawyers. Everyone was concerned about creating a two tier system, so ensuring there was a consistent benchmark for all qualifying people (including foreign qualified lawyers) made sense - and that’s how we got to the SQE. In addition to the above, they also needed to ensure there was more quality control on the work experience piece - basically someone could coast through a training contract and actually be pretty useless and they would still qualify because it was practically impossible for firms to get rid of trainees unless they did something that warranted serious disciplinary action. This will mean firms are no longer held to ransom to sign off someone’s work experience if they haven’t actually been good enough. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
General Discussion
GDL and working part time
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…