Pay training contract and qualifying work experience trainees the same, Law Society tells firms

By on

Chancery Lane calls for parity across both routes ahead of SQE roll-out

Law firms should not use the introduction of the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE) as an opportunity to pay trainees less, the Law Society has warned.

Th Chancery Lane body stressed that providers of training contracts and qualifying work experience (QWE) should pay lawyer hopefuls at least £20,217 outside London and £22,794 in the capital.

While most readers will be familiar with the traditional TC, many will perhaps be less familiar with QWE. This is part of the changes brought in under the SQE and offers a more flexible approach to on-the-job training, with trainees able to complete their two-year work experience requirement with up to four different legal employers.

Ahead of the introduction of the SQE on 1 September, Law Society president I. Stephanie Boyce warned that trainees “doing the QWE must be paid the same as those completing a training contract”.

Legal Cheek virtual student event THIS WEEK with Dechert, Clyde & Co, Pinsent Masons and ULaw: Secure your place

She continued:

“As both schemes will run in parallel in the coming years, due to the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA) transitional arrangements, this update will ensure parity across both routes. The solicitors’ profession offers an incredibly fulfilling career. With the implementation of the SQE, firms should be clear that employees, no matter which route they take, will be treated fairly.”

Unfortunately, the Society’s recommendations are completely unenforceable after the SRA scrapped minimum pay requirements for young lawyers in 2014. This means firms can choose to simply ignore them, with the latest stats showing that around a fifth of London rookies are being paid less than the Law Society’s recommended minimum wage.

Manda Banerji, chair of the Junior Lawyers Division (JLD), added: “Entry to the solicitors’ profession should be on merit only and an individual’s financial means should not pose a barrier for them to enter the profession; such barriers result in the profession losing talent and representation from diverse communities.”

She continued: “The JLD believes that the implementation of a recommended minimum salary for those completing training will have a positive impact on social mobility, equality and diversity within the legal profession.”

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

Sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub


Loan Shark

This really shouldn’t be that hard. Paying paralegals lower than those rates in 2021 is pretty criminal anyway.

Still think this QWE route will create a two-tiered profession. Should probably be more worried about future NQ rates from dodgy firms, and the proliferation of incompetent one-man bands.


Paralegal and future prospective incoming trainee open day attendee hopeful possibly maybe unless??

You’d be surprised. A lot of (London-based) paralegal roles are advertised as 21k and a decent amount even offer less than this. That being said, city firms and upwards all look after their paralegals well – as you might expect.



What I’m reading is: “Pay paralegals at City firms high 40k or low 50k p.a. because reasons”

Only a small number of paralegals currently earn that much. They’re either senior with 10+ years of experience or working in a small number of elite US firms.

I’m therefore guessing that most City firms will be happy to ignore this plea. Especially given that trainees are people they’ve selected and invested in while paralegals are not.



Sounds like you didn’t read the article pal that’s not what it says. That, at best, is a cynic’s interpretation of the headline



Completely unenforceable and we can ignore this? Thanks for the heads up.


Comments are closed.

Related Stories