"Her niece has a CV which would impress at many firms. The trainee took a first in her law degree at Nottingham Trent University, and has spent the last two years working part-time as a paralegal at a smaller firm."

Bit weird of RoF to tell us how impressive her CV is and then not detail any of the good bits.

Tell us about the impressive stuff already!

While the optics of this aren’t great for Gateley, I do question running an article on this when, at least on the details provided, the niece seems to be a very high-performer. It took me only a few minutes to work out who said TC holder is (I assume others will too) and I feel this piece unfairly leaves a permanent question mark over this young person’s abilities. 

Welcome to the legal profession! 

This unfortunately is nothing new, as "nepo babies" are rife across the legal sector. Having recently left a similar listed law firm I noticed a steady stream of family members of the CEO, COO and high-ranking partners being added to payroll and promoted above their peers despite their aptitude.  

If her cv is that good, she should have taken a job elsewhere and avoided the headlines/career taint.  

My partner works there. It's gone around the entire firm. It's nothing new, several of the board's kids either work there now or are brought in for work experience or VAC schemes, like many firms.

After the single-figure or simply zero pay rises, along with zero bonuses, maybe the family career development will be a perk that's extended to the rest of the firm's employees.

But that's the point 8.02 - the problem is that the optics are awful, not that she's not good enough. The perception of bias is unavoidable and that's not a good look for the firm or helpful to the trainee.

If you are that good, it makes sense to train at another firm and avoid the obvious issues. 

I wonder if the 29th candidate who didn't get a TC feels as charitably as 8:02am

A degree from Nottingham Trent is not impressive.

It should be a requirement to disclose to the sra when signing off the QWE whether the Candidate has closed connection with the management of the organisations where they trained. Failing to disclose that daddy has given you the long internship which constitutes your entire QWE must suggest or imply dishonesty.

Wasn’t it Walker Morris where the managing partner’s child got a training child a year or so ago?

Evershed had an official family work experience programme announced by email. I wonder if any of the worker bees' connections got in.

"Her niece has a CV which would impress at many firms. The trainee took a first in her law degree at Nottingham Trent University, and has spent the last two years working part-time as a paralegal at a smaller firm."

I spent around 10 years as part of the vacation scheme and then training contract interview team at a top-10 City firm. In all that time, I never came across a CV to match this absolutely stellar one. Frankly I don't understand why Gateley felt the need to delay matters by putting this first-rate candidate through an interview process at all before hiring her. 

there's nepotism everywhere in the profession - kids of partners in firms; turning up at their college room-mate's firm; appointing each other scratch scratch back scratch.  That's how these English firms operate.  

Nepotism steals opportunity from more deserving people

It was quite common at my old insurance law firm for the sons/daughters of insurer clients to coincidentally be given TCs. All on merit, I’m sure. 

The gutter standard of journalism here to put a target on this young professional’s back in their new place of work, before day one in post, is utterly appalling.

It’s nearly as bad as the faceless people poking fun at the individual’s achievements to date, and posting words of hurt with no thought to their consequence.

Shame on the writer, publisher and all of you posting negative comments. An unnecessary pile on all round. 

Shock horror nepotism rife in law firms. And it's not just family,it's family friends - but why target this young woman?

I wonder how Nottingham Trent degrees are usually regarded at Gateleys? Would this usually get through an initial sift? Serious question as I'm a bit out of touch. 

BW_Emery - Well said.

Nothing new. FOF works in their HR and is a good laugh after a few glasses of wine.

Surprised they don't pop up on this site more often.

Whilst I take the point on bias, etc., I do think these articles are a little spiteful.

Lots of people talk positively about their work and their specific employer (sometimes at the expense of rival employers, although of course I don't know the specifics here) and so family members and friends are inspired to follow them.

Clearly this individual has good academics - despite the sneering at Nottingham Trent above - a first is an achievement and a quick google of ""partner" AND "Nottingham trent" AND "[insert biglaw firm]"" gives a number of examples of partners who studied there.

I also don't see any sentiment in modern firms - the partners involved in recruitment aren't going to be that scared of a colleague. My workplace doesn't have a nepotism ban and the niece of a very senior individual was recently rejected.

I look forward to the "Gateley's HR has entered the chat" responses shortly. 

"The gutter standard of journalism here to put a target on this young professional’s back in their new place of work, before day one in post, is utterly appalling."

Getting a training contract by way of nepotism is an unfair boost up.

This is an unfair boot down.

The universe is in perfect harmony.

A degree from Nottingham Trent is impressive? Maybe at a high street law firm but no where else.

The worst trainee I ever had the displeasure of working with was the step-daughter of a client the law firm was trying to win from. She got the TC but the firm did not get the work - she was not offered a job on qualification... I don't think I've ever heard so many stories from someone as to how rich they are, as I did from her.

BW Emery - 'a target on her back'? Please, step away from the hyperbole. Anyone in the firm will already know they're related and will have their own opinions on the matter. 

BTW, would you mind justifying this practice, generally, in terms of firms' commitment to EDI? I'd be fascinated to hear it.

Everyone complaining about “nEpOtIsM iS eVeRyWhErE wHy TarGeT tHiS pErSoN” - the reporting and negative press create a stigma which hopefully deters more firms and nepo baby candidates from doing the same. 

I didn’t think it was a controversial opinion that nepotism isn’t a good thing?? Why should it be pushed under the rug when it happens? 

Two sides to a coin in every situation... 

You can understand the frustration with Nepotism, especially when it's blatantly staring you in the face which it can and has affected so many people across the industry. Had they walked through the door having been handed a TC - yes that would be outrageous. 

Otherwise, if we do take what's been said on base value, that they completed the normal application process the same as all other candidates... maybe we should celebrate their success (as you would any other) and show a bit of compassion? 

Imagine your daughter/son having the excitement of their TC ruined by others disregarding their achievements, claiming they should have gone elsewhere, would be super frustrating right... 

When i was reed smith they actually had a work experience scheme called "friends of the firm" for clients' kids

Just here to say I disagree with the defenders of nepotism. It's a bad look.

But if you are an adult getting a TC where your parent/aunt/uncle is the boss, fine, maybe it was on your own merits, but definitely be smart enough to recognise that people's perception of bias is natural and justified, and know that you will have to face that down. Good luck to you.

Interesting read here. States that the niece had got themselves onto two vacation schemes, which would imply that one was unsuccessful? Suppose that doesn’t suit the narrative of this article does it. 

A first class law degree accompanied by two years experience as a paralegal clearly shows the hard work and dedication the recipient has put towards gaining this TC. To write this article before they have even started is extremely egocentric. 

Also, all of the people questioning the quality of a degree from Nottingham Trent should be mindful, as this is where the writer of this article attended and completed his LPC! 

Lazy, lazy journalism. 

"When i was reed smith they actually had a work experience scheme called "friends of the firm" for clients' kids"

Honestly, kind of respect that.

It's honest and transparent about what it is. Which is a scheme designed to allow the firm to do favours for clients and longstanding members of staff, without any attempt to dress those favours up as being the honest outputs of a rigorous and meritocratic system designed to find and hire the very best.

It's not irrational as a BD initiative, it doesn't take spots out of the 'open' vac-scheme, so I struggle to be that upset about it when the firm is up front about labelling it as what it really is.

Nice to see that everyone has returned to being staunch advocates against processes which give the appearance of bias this week.

Very little of the 'they can choose who they please and you can just lump it and go elsewhere if you don't like it' school of thought on parade today.

A refreshing change from London's cognoscenti.

No one, other than the firm’s PR dept, can argue with a straight face that this is unfair / poor journalism / should not have been published. 
 

Nepotism is frowned upon for very good reasons. RoF is absolutely right to call it out (as it has done before), because doing so makes firms think twice before going down this route. 
 

If the candidate was that outstanding, she could have gone to countless other firms. Is Gateley the only decent show in town? Hardly. But she didn’t, she went to a firm where her auntie had a senior position. She should have known that this would go down badly and reflect poorly on both her and the firm. 

This is nonsense and somewhat spiteful. There isn’t a single industry where family evolves into an organization. It’s like the US and to play along sidekick, the UK are running out of crap to whine about and now, amplifying this. I didn’t come from a legacy of lawyers but if my children wanted to, I’d support it and I’d support others who wanted the same for theirs - rules of the game - high grades, good fit, coming in aware of the circumstances so the work product needs to be that much better. If that’s the door they come in on then so be it. 
 

I think the legal industry in the UK has far bigger issues for people to be dumping a log on to. 
 

Doing the LPC at Nottingham Trent is not the same as doing a full degree there. Your LPC provider makes no difference as it’s a tick box exercise. Loads of people from top unis do the LPC at random places like Nottingham Trent or Manchester Met - means nothing.  

In and amongst all of the negative comments posted under anonymity, its worth paying tribute to ‘Silly Sausage’ for breaking cover with their true identity - kudos. 

Venter - I can’t comment on the firm’s specific commitments to EDI. I do however believe a law firm employing a First Class honours student graduating from a distinguished Law School with plenty of experience on record, needs no further justification.

So when firms say, “we treat this firm like one big family” its the case until mob justice clearly says it isn’t?

Shut it RoF. You’re putting someone’s career in harms way, who is, in the opinion of the writer an accident by lineage. This isn’t funny, except perhaps the headline but to dive into it this way is ridiculous. 
 

Traditional firms started off this way. Privately held conglomerates continue to be this way. Other services sectors operate this way. Government (dare I say, royal offices as well) operate this way. 
 

Does the try hard intrepid writer here actually believe he/she/they/moron is going to upend the industry?

Newsflash. This part of the legal industry sits just fine and is somewhat benign. 
 

We all maximize use of our network and connectivity to get work in the door. Show me a single lawyer that hasn’t tried to win business using the goodwill of a relationship. That’s a bigger issue to contend with if we really want to talk about inside baseball and how firms operate. 
 

As someone who leans left off center, this is stupidly woke and completely out of touch with reality. 

Addleshaws also run a separate vac scheme that is just for staff family members with no application process

Interesting, 10:28. I think I'm also probably ok with firms having separate vac schemes for their friends and family if it doesn't detract from the places available on the normal schemes. An employment perk, almost. Keeps it clear and above board.

With advocates like Family Ties 10:54, the nepolaw lobby has its work cut out...using the royal family as an example of why TCs for a partner's family members is good actually is 

'I think the legal industry in the UK has far bigger issues for people to be dumping a log on to. '

This always drives me mad as a gambit to handwave away a topic. So if there's a bigger issue, we can't talk about smaller ones?

I think there are things far more important than the UK legal industry, so how about we don't talk about any of its issues, and focus only on Ukraine and climate change?

Sorry, just a bee that gets in my bonnet.

Also any firm should know by now that this is a terrible look and will upset employees never mind if ROF runs a story about it - after all, who do you think told them?? Pissed off people in the firm, that's who. Myopic of HR - who's in charge there? Oh.

Family Ties here… me again. 

I highlighted a few examples of “is good actually is”. 
Get tuned into reality is the short version of what I was saying. Look around you - it’s the way the world works, has worked and will forever continue to work. 
 

Some have a leg up in life. Others don’t. Doesn’t mean that those who don’t can’t break through. it’s a cold hard truth that the soft underbelly of society just can’t stand to accept, sitting back and pointing a finger like this. 
 

there’s a great docuseries about this topic. It’s called FUBAR. Man works for a three letter agency only to find out his daughter worked for the same agency. Everything goes FUBAR, she can’t stand working with him, he can’t stand seeing her being a big girl but in the end, with critical thinking and a can do attitude, they close the matter successful only for her to discover there’s no one else she’d rather work with than her father (great scene at the end when the supervising partn… officer hands her another matter opening file). Amazing story, great cast and a solid depiction of reality. 
 

@Anonymous 11:27

I don’t think the point in that comment was to handwave the issue. Clearly it is being talked about. 
 

In equal measure it’s disingenuous to conflate a smaller issue (comparatively speaking to other major problems in the biz) into a big issue the way it has been done with this hit piece. 
 

Struggling to see what the issue is here…

'it’s disingenuous to conflate a smaller issue into a big issue'

Wut.

The dodgy standard of writing from the pro-nepo side has a strong whiff of Gateley HR...

From what the article says, the CV of the individual looks like the average candidate for a TC to me.

All the comments dismissing a first class degree at Nottingham Trent are snobbish. It has a reasonably well established law school and I know many good non-nepo-baby trainees/solicitors that graduated with a first from Trent. 

However, it is just average for a TC applicant to have paralegal experience and a 1st or 2.1 at degree level. I want to know exactly what makes this candidate better than anyone else, other than her relative's high position.

I scraped on to a vac scheme a few years ago, one of 12 spots. I understand there were around 800 applicants.

Among that dozen was a woman who casually admitted that she'd missed the deadline for applications.

Any other candidate's application would, of course, have been binned if they missed the deadline. Her dad was a big corporate client, though.

To be fair to her and the firm, her dad should never have asked the matter partner for the favour - it put the partner and the firm in an invidious position - how can you say no to a massive client? But a blanket ban on that sort of access would have allowed him to say 'sorry, my hands are tied'. 

A colleague failed to get on that vac scheme, and she worked so hard on her application, and it was so important to her. She got on - but a year later - and got a TC and qualified, and is a superb lawyer.

This is normal here. Partners and children working together. Partners’ fellow partners/colleagues giving preferential treatment to their children.

If it looks like nepotism and quacks like… well you get it. It’s nepotism.

The future trainee should really have thought twice before applying to a firm where fam relation was former head of recruitment. It doesn’t look good whatever the outcome and leaves the recruitment team in an impossible situation.

If trainee does have a first and some experience then trainee should have had their choice of firms.

Going for this particular firm is going to leave people wondering whether it was nepotism and leave trainee wondering whether they could have secured a TC elsewhere on own merits in the face of fair competition, whether family connections played a part in the firm’s decision or not.. it will haunt for the duration of their career.

Even if COO was nothing to do with the actual decision (and good work making sure the audit is clean!), does that team really want to piss off a partner former COO Hr person by declining a TC to their relative? 

Should have had a family chat before this application was made.. 

GATELEY IS A GOOD QUALITIE LAW FIRM, AND THESE SMURS TO ATTEMPT TO ATTACK IT BY IT'S COMPETITORS IN THE MEDIA IS NOT ON, AND WE'RE NOT HAVING IT.

THERE'S NUTTIN WRONG WITH KEEPING FAMILY CLOSE- U WILL ALWAYS GET BETTER RESULTS AS PER THE FAST AND THE FURIOUS; THEY ONLY WON BECAUSE THEY STUCK TOGETHER AND WERE FAM.

A degree from a former poly indicates a low level of intellect and education. Objectively, at any rate, it looks as though nepotism played some part here.

"A degree from a former poly indicates a low level of intellect and education."

I'm not sure that's true.

A job in the British Virgin Islands, or any other similarly grubby offshore jurisdiction, is the real test for that.

I would looove to know how many other Gateley trainees took their degree at an ex-poly. Plenty, I’m sure!

Vin Diesel 11 August 23 11:42

Struggling to see what the issue is here

Me too, keep it in the faaaaaamly, its the best way

Gateleys are listed, right?

So they’re not allowed to go anywhere near this sort of behaviour. Why has no one pointed this out?

They're not listed. Their shares are traded on AIM.

It’s not news. What’s wrong with a bit of nepotism?  Just the political correct brigade whining again

Went to school with a guy whose family own a household-name brand.  He’s now in a senior role at the company (presumably in title only since he wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed). He actually went back to the school to unironically give a talk to the students about how to build a successful career. Not sure how he kept a straight face. 

If she did vac schemes only at gateley, it just proves how keen she was on the firm - nowhere else was even worth applying to. That’s the sort of commitment to the firm that I like to see in my juniors. 

@Anonymous 11 August 23 09:59

OK, so you put the step daughter on a TC to get a contract and then kicked her out when the contract didn't materialize. Exactly what moral high ground are you laying claims to here??

Christ, the amount of people shitting on this *junior* person because of a degree from a former polytechnic. Touch of class that. If you’ve actually been in private practice long enough, you will have come across numerous absolutely shocking lawyers from all sorts of unis. In fact, I’m pretty sure no one knows what they’re doing despite where they went to uni when they were 18 - it’s just loads of people regurgitating PLC notes and saying “that’s not market” on boring conference calls. Doesn’t take a genius.
 

Also, where is all the anger at all the old Etonian/oxbridge educated partners with family/social connections allowing them to rake it in through client connections - AKA 80% of the equity partners across the city - but getting some more socially diverse and hard working associates (with imposter syndrome) to deal with all of their work in exchange for a chance at equity and a “way in”. That’s the real boring crime that completely reflects awful British society. All well and good getting angry about a training contract awarded through nepotism, but blindly ignoring the fact that the majority of the big hitters in the industry mostly benefit from similar socio-economic privileges that got them to where they are today. 

Mightn’t it be a tiny bit inappropriately biased to rule out candidates simply bcs they’re related to senior employees at the organisation?

Lawyer12345 12 August 23 00:52 - you are clearly very chippy. Grow up.

Ways to get into law:

Have a parent as a partner in a firm or high up at a client

Go to the right school 

Go to Oxbridge (which for large amount of people means 1 and 2 above are also sorted)

Class gap getting far worse in law

Rookie mistake.

What usually happens is partners at city firms do a kids TC swap: partner at one firm will give TC to kid of partner at another firm and that partner will return the favour. Everyone wins. Except meritocracy.

I don’t see why law firms owned by partners can’t act like any other private business, and be proud of links to previous generations of stewards of the firm, and positively encourage it.

In every other business it’s a matter to be proud of. XYZ and Sons…?

Having a family connection can ensure long-term stability and standards being kept up, rather than just run the practice like a money making machine.

@Fortunate Son 12 August 23 09:16

‘’Mightn’t it be a tiny bit inappropriately biased to rule out candidates simply bcs they’re related to senior employees at the organisation? ‘
 

No. 
 

Candidate and COO should have discussed it and then both decided to rule out the candidate applying altogether - to prevent exactly this.

Of all the 1000s of legal firms and depts in the UK, of the 100s of well known practices, of the dozens of high paying high flying city US (take your pick of precious metal) circle firms, WTF would you pick the one that a family member works at? The only one where applying to it would cause this scenario? A scenario where any law student having gone through conflict theory would have avoided.. 
 

The answer? It’s an easy way in - and on that, it’s nepotism.
 

And No, the fact the candidate did work experience does not mean candidate got in on own merits - every decent candidate has some experience these days. In these circumstances, it’s still nepotism and one that shows a tragic lack of foresight. 

Dentons is even worse especially in the Middle East. The lawyers and non-lawyers in the Doha and Amman offices are all one big family. 

https://www.lawfuel.com/dentons-desert-storm-crisis-claims-of-nepotism-colonialism-and-misdeeds-within-the-middle-east-offices-of-the-worlds-largest-law-firm/

@BW_Emery 11 August 23 09:35

‘’The gutter standard of journalism here to put a target on this young professional’s back in their new place of work, before day one in post, is utterly appalling.

It’s nearly as bad as the faceless people poking fun at the individual’s achievements to date, and posting words of hurt with no thought to their consequence.

Shame on the writer, publisher and all of you posting negative comments. An unnecessary pile on all round. ‘
 

The reason this is provoking such an uproar is because people don’t like nepotism. What is wrong isn’t the criticism on here - that is to be expected given the circumstances reported. What is wrong is your coddling attitude and those doing the same in support of nepotism. The trainee chose to do this in a way which would attract criticism. 

Whilst I’m sure many rightly have some sympathy for the young person’s feelings, they are a lawyer in the making and this is a poor choice and a terrible show of nepotism and judgment. Their feelings should never trump the wrongness of this situation they created - and you putting their feelings above that is just typical of the what is wrong in the current era - where feelings of the wrongdoer trump the wrong doing. Perhaps reflect on what you are contributing to. 

‘Anonymous 11 August 23 20:11

It’s not news. What’s wrong with a bit of nepotism?  Just the political correct brigade whining again’
 

…

Good on you - just you stoke those flames and watch the fireworks. Hope you had foresight to bring popcorn. 

The Corporate Chinny 11 August 23 10:12

..

Imagine your daughter/son having the excitement of their TC ruined by others disregarding their achievements, claiming they should have gone elsewhere, would be super frustrating right... 

Just re-read your comment about two sides to every coin… and your last sentence got me. Specifically your choice of the word ‘achievements’ in a nepotism scenario. See, everyone else who applied and got a TC has achievements as they got in on merit.. but where you are related to some senior partner, how is anyone ever to know if your ‘achievements’ were anything more than simply being related to that person whatever else might be on your cv. So yeah we could celebrate that achievement.. but should we? 

I hope our Editor could look into a wider issue here: how many follow in the footsteps of their parents in the legal profession? In some professions it is common, such as with officers in the armed services. Nepotism is already an issue there and rules are in place against such activities. Nevertheless, following in your parent's footsteps means you get an insider's knowledge om how things really work and what to do in order to be promoted. 

My impression from the people I know, is that it is common in commercial law but uncommon in IPR law in the West. In Japan, IPR law firms are still often family owned and it is practically expected that at least some of the children should join the firm.

‘Anonymous 14 August 23 15:11

I hope our Editor could look into a wider issue here: how many follow in the footsteps of their parents in the legal profession? In some professions it is common, such as with officers in the armed services. Nepotism is already an issue there and rules are in place against such activities. Nevertheless, following in your parent's footsteps means you get an insider's knowledge om how things really work and what to do in order to be promoted. ..’

I think most people agree that there’s nothing wrong with following in footsteps of ancestors, or getting advice from someone (a parent or otherwise) already in the industry, or what needs to be done to get promoted.

Many will though draw the line at whether it is right to use a parent’s influence or family member’s position to get you a promotion or big job - particularly in a competitive process like training contracts where opportunities are limited - so where you get one on the back of a favour, someone else misses out. 

@Wut 15 August 23 10:13

I agree fully with what you write. My inquiery is not about questionable practice, more like how the younger generation perceive the work and life of their parents. I know of families where they have been lawyers in 5+ generations, while in the majority of cases the children find other careers. I see the same pattern among officers: either long lineages or just single generations. 

The sample is not that great, I had hoped looking into this could something more about this profession than just rating toilets and biscuits in the various law firms.

It would be naive to believe that the relative and COO of the company, the person responsible for HR and possibly the Training Principal had no input to the recruitment of her niece...please, treat us with some common sense!

I wish I had the energy to care about this stuff. 

In my TC cadre was a nephew of one of the big players in the firm. Turned out said player had had his arm twisted by his sister to employ her son 

I never saw this boss happier than the day nephew failed his exams and supplied the excuse for his uncle to give him the boot as he’d cunningly added a caveat to his sibling promise. He was a good lawyer.

How can I tell how talented she is without knowing her name and without seeing her photo?

Makes perfect sense to me. If they are relatives of someone good then they are more likely to be good. And you will secure greater loyalty from the COO. 
 

lighten up Bolshies