Writer wonders if he should have become a corporate lawyer

By on

Sunday Times’ Josh Glancy unsettled by wealth divide opening up between him and pals from Oxford who went into law

A well-known millennial journalist has penned an article in which he wonders whether he should have become a lawyer.

In his regular column in The Sunday Times magazine, Josh Glancy asks “Was I naïve?” for not going into corporate law, as he notes that pals who followed that path “are all getting filthy rich”.

Although he has “no regrets [about] not going to law school”, having “toyed with the idea of course, just like every other middle-class arts graduate in Britain”, Glancy admits feeling unease about the wealth gap opening up between him and his old uni mates who opted to do the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) and since bagged training contracts and pupillages in commercial law.

The lawyers now “are busy buying three-bedroom houses and gentrifying the pants off inner-city barrios”, reports Glancy, adding: “One mate even did a real-life kitchen extension recently, which felt very boomerish of him.”

The 2020 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

This has left those who went into media, arts and publishing pondering the “moment when those impulsive, ill-informed decisions you made in your early twenties really come home to roost. When what began as a minor income gap among friends has, in some cases, become a yawning wealth chasm.”

But having glimpsed this parallel universe, University of Oxford graduate Glancy isn’t entirely sure he made the wrong decision, explaining:

“Having toured some of these shiny new homes, I can’t help but think back to my 20-year-old work-experience self, snoozing his way through a long peroration by one Keir Starmer QC, being scowled at and deciding that screw the law, I was better off being a writer, man.”

Certainly, as a columnist and Washington Bureau Chief for The Sunday Times Glancy has hardly done badly. Recalling a spell of legal work experience, he says: “I couldn’t stop falling asleep”, before concluding: “I would have made a terrible lawyer”

For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek's careers events:

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub



Thanks for mentioning this article – I’d missed it in yesterday’s paper.



Given that he is being paid to write utter shite each week, he landed on his feet. His column is terrible and is devoid of wit, interest or any point.



But you still read it every week?



No, I skip through it. It is the third worst thing in The Times/Sunday Times after the Sophie Beresiner surrogacy dross and the Melanie Reid column.


A Torney

I miss The Pedant on a Saturday. It was a heavenly read in these dumbed down times.



Who? Alex?


Walter White

There are other paths to making great fortune.



And being a law firm wagecuck isn’t one of them. Real wealth is made in the world of business, not fluffing clients and trying to hit your billables.




If you’ve got the balls to stick your name on the door and grow a firm from day 1 to global player you can still get pretty minted. Just ask the guys who thought a litigation boutique could do well and set up Quinn Emmanuel.



Agreed, but then again, that’s Quinn. 99% of a**hats who drop inane “Kirklan NQ driving my lambo” comments on this website don’t realise that being a lawyer is not a path to riches in any real sense.


Kirkland NQ

But if you’re not at the ‘land are you really a lawyer?


This is how out of touch so many people are. To many from normal background, six figures in your twenties is riches in a real sense. Certainly it is to me, who now earns more in my late twenties than my entire immediate family combined.

Kirkland NQ

That’s nothing, I’m in my early twenties and earn more than the population of several African countries combined.

Lord Crown

My friend, these business rich people did not study business surprise surprise! They studied different fields (including law) and after a few years of building expertise in the field they jumped ship which is why a lot of lawyers own massive businesses or are major shareholders in such. Law is a multi faceted field that after working long enough you can enter most business fields, therefore many times being a lawyer leads to riches most of which are not from their partnership pay. I’m not saying all of them do but being a wagecuck teaches you to work long hours, think smart and expand your knowledge.

So, sorry I did not buttress your bitter sentiment on legal prospects but try opening your mind a bit instead of trying to comfort yourself that you ‘won in life’ by not being a wagecuck and blindly stating that lawyers do not achieve real riches.

Newsflash! You bitching about it, thinking you will blue sky an idea one day that will blow up, is certainly not going to lead you to riches. Back to day dreaming.



U high blud ?



Mmm lucky enough to buy three bedroom houses?

Maybe just move out of London.



Can you believe it lads, they’ve only gone and solved the housing crisis! Bravo sir, I say sir!



A decent amount of partners earn £500k+. That’s good coin.



£500k was good coin. In 1999. If you are not taking home a bar a year you are not a playa in 2020.



They can even buy a 3 bed ex-council property next to Whitechapel market!



Guess it all depends how rich your parents are



This article flashed up on my linkedin and my only thought was that legal cheek is now channeling the daily mash.



Funny, I’m a lawyer who wishes I had chosen to be a writer.

You may make good money in the law. But it’s devoid of and indeed stunts your creativity. If you have a remotely arty/creative personality, like to paint in broad brush rather than minute detail, then it feels like a life wasted. You only get one after all.

If he’s concerned about money then clearly newspaper journalism shouldn’t be the end game – but there are other paths to money through writing.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories