The first four paralegals have become eligible to qualify as solicitors without undertaking a training contract under new rules for the profession.

The trailblazers applied to be recognised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under the "equivalent means" provision it introduced last year, otherwise known as the 'paralegal shortcut'*. 20 more are on the waiting list. The provisions open up the profession to paralegals who have passed the LPC and can prove that they have gained sufficient experience on the job to qualify as solicitors. It gives them equivalent status to someone who has completed their training contract but not yet won an NQ position.

    That paralegal over there? She's after your job. Send 'em all back.

The SRA has rebranded TCs as "Periods of Recognised Training" in order to recognise the new class of pre-solicitor, which looks likely to grow rapidly if the number of training contracts on offer continues to dwindle. SRA policy manager of education and regulation Carol Cook said that paralegals keen to take advantage should keep a work diary, take a record of appraisals and work with employers to "set objectives and development needs that meet training stage outcomes". I.e. fetch the partner's gym kit when they ask.

*and hopefully soon as the Paratrain Method or the Uncontract Insertion.

Tip Off ROF

Comments

Anonymous 13 March 15 08:58

I accept there are plenty of perfectly good paralegals, who will make perfectly good solicitors, but simply do not have what it takes to get through an assessment centre. However, this still seems wrong. Quick poll: is anyone here aware of their firms allowing qualification by 'paralegal shortcut' yet?

Anonymous 13 March 15 11:14

Lets be honest, this is a fantastic approach, most solicitors don't need the vast training and associated costs to do their job, its removal of a barrier to entry in an outdated profession.

The simple truth is that it isn't that hard to do many jobs that sols do.

Anonymous 13 March 15 11:52

This is not a 'shortcut' as you put it. The SRA make an assessment based on certain learning outcomes (the same criteria as that applied to trainees) gained in the workplace over a period of many years, far more than a two year training contract. This assessment is far more stringent than the standard training contract assessments and so by gaining an NQ via the 'shortcut' route the profession is getting a much more well rounded and capable lawyer. Surely the biggest 'shortcut' to entry into the profession is getting 'qualified' abroad: a couple of years at Auckland University then straight in as a qualified lawyer in England.

Anonymous 13 March 15 13:01

The reality, actually, is a dilution of the skill of a solicitor. Paralegals can excel in a certain practice area. Solicitor's breadth of training allows us to high areas of law outside our specialism but on which we have legal knowledge. The same cannot necessarily be said of paralegals.

Anonymous 13 March 15 13:14

The real shortcut is the CPE where non-law graduates instantly become lawyers without having to bother with three years of tedium. From that perspective, the paralegal route seems perfectly acceptable. In fact, under the old rules, you could skip university all together by doing articles for five years directly out of school.

Roll On Friday 13 March 15 13:49

Anonymous at 13.01 talks oblate spheroids, although s/he seems to concede the point by stating paralegals aren't "necessarily" trained to know about the law outside their specialist area. That of course is the point of the PRT, which applies equally to trainee solicitors. Also (although irrelevant to my point) most paralegals available through agencies are either barristers or LPC graduates. Also, I doubt I am the only lawyer who has encountered solicitors whose knowledge even of their supposedly specialist area was surprisingly incomplete (to put it nicely).

It may be regrettable that people with less formal qualifications are allowed to become solicitors, but only from a protectionist perspective!

Anonymous 13 March 15 14:23

"a couple of years at Auckland University then straight in as a qualified lawyer in England."

Perhaps you meant to say "completing an undergraduate law degree at a good university and qualifying as a solicitor at (if they're the sort of candidate getting hired in London) a top commercial firm in a well-respected jurisdiction, before completing the (what is now fairly gruelling) QLTS..."

Not just condescending, but ignorant with a twinge of racism too. Nice.

Anonymous 13 March 15 23:08

Most trainees at law firms these days are glorified paper pushers with parents who know the right people. Let's face it the training contract at most magic circle and international firms is just two years of pretending to meet SRA competencies and nothing more. A training contract does not make a good solicitor. Most newly qualified solicitors these days are just a bunch of posh boys pretending to be smart.

Anonymous 14 March 15 19:50

What anon 23.08 said. Glorified, arrogant, paper pushers who need at least another 4 years of PQE before they become even vaguely competent and even then most of them couldn't do it if it weren't for the armies of PSLs doing the research and precedent drafting for them. Take them away from the spoonfeeding and most junior fee earners would crumble.

Anonymous 16 March 15 19:29

Take out some of the vitriol and no one would disagree with what anon 23.08 and 19.50 say. There's no magic to a "training contract" - the clincher is experience - and that only comes with, er, experience.

Anonymous 17 March 15 13:02

"A couple of years at Auckland University..."

I wouldn't normally comment on such obvious ignorance, but it's too tempting. Not only does NZ require one to complete a full law degree (4 years min.), it also has a mandatory professionals course (6 months) before someone can qualify as a solicitor in that jurisdiction. You then need to sit the QLTT to qualify in the UK, not to mention the couple of years experience in a firm in NZ before a London law firm would even look at you. Doesn't really sound like a "shortcut" does it?

Anonymous 17 March 15 15:48

I have worked with many talented paralegals who fully deserve the chance to qualify via this route. So long as the SRA is happy that the applicant meets its criteria then who are we to criticize this method of entry. I for one am happy to embrace this forward thinking change in the method of qualification.

Anonymous 17 March 15 16:41

To counter the views of those that think a training contract is just a necessary step and has no intrinsic value, I would say that the true benefit of a training contract is the trainee's ability to try different areas of practice at the law firm they train at, which will help them make a more informed decision on where to qualify and also give them sufficiently broad experience to potentially switch practice area in the next year or two if they later find they've chosen incorrectly. I don't know many paralegals who have been provided with this breadth of experience and it will cost them in the long run. Similarly, although not quite on point with this article, it concerns me that I have seen many instances of trainees notionally choosing four different seats but, thanks to one of them being a client secondment, another perhaps being a post overseas, effectively only having trained in one or two (ie litigation purely due to SRA requirements if that's not their chosen practice area) practice areas. This also negates the actual benefit of being a trainee.

Roll On Friday 18 March 15 08:53

Even if a paralegal qualifies by this route the firm that employs them will be under no obligation to pay them as an NQ or give then an NQ role, so while it may be another route to qualification it isn't necessarily a route to an NQ job.

And if the paralegal route upsets people you are in for a shock when the traditional non-degree articles route to qualification is reintroduced in the form of an apprentice route.

Anonymous 18 March 15 11:21

This is nothing new, people were able to count paralegal experience against their TC under the old regime. I qualified this way 15 years ago.

Anonymous 29 March 15 04:09

"To harbor spiteful feelings against ordinary people for not being 'heroes' is possible only for narrow-minded or embittered man", Anon 23:11. Chekhov, A (1892).

Congratulations to those already, or about to be, qualified. You have been signed off on your experience gained and you will most likely have worked very hard for this recognition.