Baker & McKenzie has defended its practice of offering some newly qualified solicitors fixed term contracts instead of permanent jobs.

An insider told RollOnFriday that the use of fixed term contracts has created a "really bad feeling" in the firm which has been compounded by the fact that NQs on the contracts are "refused" Baker's traditional four weeks qualification leave and, they claimed, bonuses.

    Also, 'fixies' aren't allowed to drive

To its credit Bakers addressed the criticisms head on when contacted by RollOnFriday. A spokesman said none of this year's NQs are on FTCs, and only two were put on them last year. He said the arrangement was viewed positively by the firm and enabled it to "maximise our retention of the best talent in line with the needs of our business", while it was untrue that bonuses were only meted out to permanent staff. As this year's bonus was a voucher the confusion is understandable. And he said that qualification leave was only delayed until positions became permanent, because the work which justified short term employment was often urgent.

Bakers is by no means the only firm using fixed term contracts. And though some NQs view them as "effectively extending their training contracts", their growing use indicates that the traditional concept of a safe transition from trainee to qualified lawyer is more and more under threat.
Tip Off ROF

Comments

Anonymous 26 September 14 11:15

I dimly remember from the LPC employment law module that if a contract was rolled over for more than two years it became effectively permanent (inasmuch that the employee had employment rights - as opposed to contractual rights).

Anonymous 01 October 14 14:35

DLA Piper have also done the same in their Leeds office. Some trainees were told there were no jobs but then offered a years fixed term contract.