How do we tackle the bottleneck? Do students need more information before deciding on the path that is right for them? Should there be more regulation? Or is the market best left to work things out?

As national representative for LPC students and trainees on the Law Society’s governing body, I have encountered a number of recurring complaints from my constituents and I wanted to try and do something about them – or at least start a debate which can inform policy and regulation.

The main difficulty for my constituents seems to stem from the ‘bottleneck’ – the point prospective solicitors reach where they find themselves just one applicant among many for training contract places.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority’s work-based learning (WBL) scheme is ostensibly going to change things and it does have many positive aspects, not least the potential for more participatory training and increased flexibility. In respect of the bottleneck, however, it appears as if the scheme will just move it along – so rather than being one applicant among many, students who have completed the WBL will be one qualified solicitor among many searching for a newly qualified job role.

Free marketIt has been suggested that the best time to tackle the bottleneck is at the point of entry to undergraduate law degrees or during the LPC. But I’ve also heard the argument that it should not be tackled at all because the free market will ensure only the very best candidates ‘make it’.

I am wary of being too paternalistic and of ‘crusading’ against the law schools – I want to stress that I do not see them as adversaries. By and large they offer quality tuition. I have also had a lot of contact with the College of Law, which is incredibly supportive of the work of the Law Society and the Junior Lawyers Division. Indeed, the JLD and the College of Law have developed a retraining package covering the basics of private client law and practice, to help those who struggle to find work to retrain in a different area.

A lack of informationWhat I do want to stress is that students are not able to conduct an appropriate level of due diligence in researching what is right for them because they lack information.

The result is that they have little or no awareness of the Institute of Legal Executives, of part-time LPC, or of how best to approach getting a training contract at a smaller firm.

There are also common misconceptions about the LPC among students: that it offers a fresh start when a student might have a degree that is less than impressive in the eyes of recruiters; that students are ‘post-grads’ akin to those studying master’s degrees rather than, essentially, paying customers enrolling on a vocational, not an academic course; and that the LPC is a highly transferable qualification and superior to other postgraduate qualifications because it relates to law.

Ideas floated to address the bottleneck include: implementing an independent LPC student survey along the lines of the National Student Survey; an alternative LPC prospectus; more regulation by the SRA; a focused information campaign by the Law Society; entrance examinations; and the Law Society taking action to limit the number of LPC places, and even to limit places at law schools to those with training contracts or WBL positions.

I am not sure how many of these ideas are practical, workable or even sensible – but it is important for the concerns of LPC students and trainees to be heard. Even if no action is taken, the fact that the debate has so far drawn in students and LPC applicants means that it has been an effective means of disseminating information, which does not seem to be reaching those who need it and informing those who might be able to do something about the situation.

Beth Wanono is Law Society council member representing LPC students and trainees and is writing in that capacity