‘I’m a career changer in my 30s. Will City law firms give me a chance?’

I’m currently doing the sqe (sponsored by an MC firm) and most people in my class are in their mid 20s at least, with a good proportion in their late 20s, 30 is not too far off! On my vacation scheme a few years back (different firm but still a city law firm), all the trainees I met were in their late 20s/early 30s! some people are saying you can’t leverage your career up until now but I completely disagree. If you have an interest in marketing, maybe this means you have developed an interest in IP law, just by way of example? You’ve seen how certain things work from the client side, how does this help you become a great solicitor? I think it’s all about perspective and anyone can leverage anything if they’re creative and introspective enough, even a supermarket job or being a SAHM. I would say the only thing is to be prepared to answer questions about why you didn’t go into law to start with or why you’re making the return now, and whether you’re up for the big jump in lifestyle from a 9-5 to a city law gig. I think it’s tricky to take time off your job just to do a vacation scheme but I think vac scheme route might make more sense since you haven’t had legal experience at least for a while now. Do a combo of both TC and vac scheme apps anyways and see what works for you. Best of luck to you I’m certain you can and will smash it!

I can see the comments so far have been very positive. Not to put a damper on your enthusiasm but my experience is that it’s an uphill battle (but I will outline the positives at the end). A lot of law firms are still very conservative, they prefer an inexperienced young person to mould into their own image. I found US firms to be less so; I didn’t have much luck, but what luck I had was with US firms. I would also warn you that a lot of the application process is not adapted to someone who is working, some firms mandate you to do a 3wk vac scheme, which uses up most of your AL, most firms only give you a couple of weeks’ notice for interviews and VCs (i.e. you’ll only find out if you’ve got the VC 2 weeks before it’s dues to start, I had to turn one down because I couldn’t get leave). I have a close family member who works in a big law firm, they tell me that they do get a lot of ‘true’ career changers applying (I say ‘true’ to mean someone who was fully immersed in a non-law-related career), but most of them get rejected because there is a bias against them.

This brings me to the next point, which relates to what a previous commenter said about career changers finding it hard to adapt to being managed by a younger person and behave like ‘bellends’. I cannot comment on the individuals they refer to, but objectively, you will be joining a very conservative and hierarchical organisation where people will not be used to working with and managing people of different ages, experiences and life stages. I imagine a career changer might make a younger ‘senior’ feel uncomfortable just by being more experienced in life and the non-technical aspects of work, additionally, a career changer, particularly an older one, will not stand for being treated like sh*t, and will stand up for themselves, or question a seniors decision, I imagine to a younger senior this might constitute ‘bellend’ behaviour. If you have a lot of pride or are not hugely self-aware of how your behaviour might be taken in the environment that you’re in, you might struggle and alienate people and this might be a deal breaker. I can tell you from personal experience that it can be hard and isolating to be very different to those around you.

Furthermore, I’d just like to mention that I, like one of the above commenters, don’t think that law firms (esp large ones) particularly care what industry experience you have. That’s not to say it’s not valuable, but don’t expect to leverage it much until you’re quite senior. I think this might become a problem if you think you’ve been hired for your marketing experience and will qualify into the relevant department to leverage your expertise, however, this might not happen.

Lastly, to end on a positive. I personally think (obvs I’m biased) that career changers bring a lot to a law firm and I’d love to have more career changer colleagues. Also, it will put you to an advantage eventually, because you have a USP that 95% of your colleagues won’t have, and when you start facing clients, this will show. Also, in a commercial law firm, you’d get to meet some really interesting and impressive clients and will probably be involved in very interesting work (even if the bit you’re doing is not interesting), and it might provide a good stepping stone to something better.

Good luck, whatever you decide!

In the same respect as non-law students entering city law, I find career changers bring a different perspective and way of thinking which is refreshing (and valued) at the MC outfit I am at. The substance of that prior career is not all that relevant, but your way of looking at the world can be (albeit it’ll need to be tempered, moulded, and applied within the broad constructs within which firms already function (and where change happens slowly!)). I know people who had been in other careers previously, ranging from other professional
services, academia to the arts.

Speaking with career changer trainees, or those simply coming to law slightly later than a ‘fresh’ grad, one of the biggest challenges seems to be engaging with their ‘cohort’ (given the seat shifting and so naturally being most directly connected with individuals who are younger / have, so far, had a different life experience). A training programme can be hard work and so making an effort to form those bonds (whatever age, background, or experience the individuals) for moral support is important.

However, from a professional performance perspective, some of the best trainees / juniors I’ve worked with are those who come to the law having experienced a (different) professional environment, are driven to make their career change work / to succeed, and have made a conscious decision that law is for them. The technical ability comes with time: frankly, a grad fresh out of uni might know the ‘academic version’ of law, but can’t yet apply it in a client ready manner and aren’t themselves at all differentiated from or ‘better’ than non-law converters. Take the plunge, work hard, and – I’m sure – you’ll excel (and your colleagues who have been qualified for some time will be sure to welcome a different perspective).

However, as in the comments above, the biggest challenges (other than the cohort relationships) will likely be: demonstrating (with evidence) that you’re committed and have properly considered the career change; accessing the application process which is often set up for penultimate year undergrads; and – very openly – accepting that you will be directly supervised (pretty much throughout your entire ‘associate level’ legal career) by people who are younger (but more experienced) than you.

On a practical level, firms do all have a different vibe. Therefore, going to some open days / speaking to lawyers at firms in which you’re interested is probably going to be important to find the right fitting firm for you and getting a steer on how to present your decision at interview (eg using the Aspiring Solicitors contacts if you don’t have your own). Good luck with whichever route you choose!

I regret that Betteridge’s Law applies.

I am a legal recruitment consultant.
Recently, I represented a candidate who graduated law in another country (Europe) in early 2000s, then had a break from law for personal reasons for over 10 years, then qualified in a Commonwealth jurisdiction, got a job in a BIG firm overseas. a few years later they moved to the UK and got a job in an American law firm in London when they were around 45 years old, with no UK experience. they also sat SQE when they were around 45. recently had a few interviews with international law firms in London ad an offer.
good luck!