Does the law begin at 40?

Law firms are increasingly dominated by youthful energy.

Where does this leave older employees who are young at heart and are striving to succeed in the legal world? Jacky Lewis discovers an ambivalent attitude

The new Labour government of 1997 brought with it a new flavour - its own political youth culture.

MPs are young as never before and Tony Blair is the youngest Prime Minister since Pitt the Younger.

The political world that had traditionally welcomed those with age and experience now embraces a younger style.And then there is the dot-com brat-pack - none seemingly older than 30.

There has certainly been a sea change.

The law now seems to be reflecting this attitude towards age and, at the trainee level, some suggest it has become a place exclusively backing the younger players at the risk of losing those who might bring with them maturity, people skills, and life experience.

Many legal employers consider it unrealistic to be expected to give out training contracts to people in their forties.

Training costs a lot of time, money, and effort which may not be worth only ten or 15 years of work in return.

Older job-seekers may be met with euphemistic phrases such as 'you are overqualified for this position'.So is the law ageist? One senior HR director of a large City firm who declined to be named states categorically that her firm would not consider taking on older trainees.

'Of course we are ageist; offering training contracts to older applicants would have serious disadvantages.

Our firm likes to think we can shape trainees into our particular mould; we have a certain style, we are known for it, we have a certain way of doing things.

We just can't guarantee that older trainees would espouse that style.' But she adds: 'I personally think it is a narrow view; it prevents other perspectives, and dampens down creativity.'Nevertheless, Jeremy Freedman, a family lawyer at Freedman Green in north London, took a view when taking on his firm's new trainee, Donna Weisz.

Ms Weisz is in her thirties, with teenage children, and his niche family practice appreciated the skills she could bring to their work.

'Donna comes with some real experience in the real world,' he says.

Ms Weisz found it almost impossible to get a training contract.

'I wrote to lots of firms, targeted all areas of London and avoided the large City firms...

I have a pile of all the rejections I received.' She got so tired of the meaningless 'good luck' letters sent to her that she decided to network through friends.

'The other way totally failed me.' Ms Weisz strongly maintains that a newly qualified solicitor like her will be the best possible investment.

'We are women who have had our families and have many good, hard-working years ahead of us to devote to the firm...

I invested six years of my life studying; that's not to be taken lightly - people like me are really serious about a career in law.

Most law firms don't even give us an initial opportunity to explain how serious we are.' Anna, who declined to use her real name, made a late decision to become a solicitor and is now considering changing to the Bar.

She will be looking for a pupillage next year but she is wary of the prospect.

The 47-year-old south London solicitor says she is 'on notice' that chambers are 'really not looking for people who are over 45'.

She says they are looking for 'bright young things with glittering academic backgrounds'.

Those joining the law late and who can potentially bring great richness to the Bar, but 'without the glitter behind them', are not a tempting prospect, she says.But there can be many advantages in taking on older trainees; after all they have an edge of maturity that is lacking in many young graduates.

They tend to be more socially skilled, are good at handling people, and are better communicators.Sarah, who asked not to be named, is a Manchester-based solicitor who qualified in her thirties.

She says she actually found it easier at her age to find a training contract.

'They found they could throw me in at the deep end and I wasn't going to panic...

I've got dependent children and I'm reliant on the job.'Nevertheless, Sarah predicts that she will come up against ageism in the future.

'I would like to become a district judge in seven or eight years' time when I am more experienced, but the Lord Chancellor's Department like to get their money out of you and I think they may consider me to be too old...

my gut feeling is that they don't consider the best person for the job - they just want to see a good amount of working life out of you.' The negative experiences of some entering the profession later does not seem to be reflected by those at the cutting edge of recruitment.

Ann Halpern, head of training at City firm Norton Rose, says she appreciates older trainees.

'I absolutely love them...

they know about life, they know about work, and they know how to keep a balance.' Norton Rose.

she says, 'never turn anyone away, but will look at each applicant on their merits...

they may well have a lot to offer, may have held senior positions in business for example and have existing contacts that will be useful to them in the law'.

However, older entrants will find 'there is a steep learning curve'.

Ms Halpern says older trainees may sometimes find it more difficult to adjust to this mindset.

Then there is the promotion ladder to climb.

It is Norton Rose's experience that older qualifiers believe they ought to be able to rise up more quickly than is possible and they may well experience a 'frustration plateau' while waiting.

Tracey Latteman, practice manager at City firm Bates Wells & Braithwaite, says age is simply not a relevant factor in her firm.

She says the partners 'welcome talent at whatever age...

age has never been an issue here'.

It has recently trained a teacher who is 'older than 40'.

'She had experience of life and the experience of actually going out to work.

She is great at interacting with her work colleagues and a great team player.

Having previous work experience helped her understand what it is to be an employee,' she says.

Maddie Blackburn, a 48-year-old former health visitor and Child Protection Officer, who qualified almost two years ago, has strong feelings about the world of the late qualifier.

She studied for her solicitors' exams with a group whose average age was around 40.

The oldest student was about 56.

She suggests such applicants have to say 'look, I've got something to give you'.

She had skills in areas other than the law and an established network.

She could also safely assure potential employers she would not be having any more children.

Ms Blackburn says young graduates fresh out of university may find some difficulty adjusting to the 12-hour day lawyers find themselves working.

It can all prove to be a culture shock.

'When there's a 28-year-old partner on an interview panel and I turn up aged 45, they are thinking that they couldn't possibly ask me to do the photocopying - but for the person coming in realising that they have to start from the bottom...

it's a big mindset change.

It's also changing the culture of the profession and realising that a person with different skills can complement the profession.'Firms are looking for compatibility in the workplace and will worry how well you will fit in with the young trainees; older trainees may even find themselves acting as mentors for their younger colleagues.' Recalling the confession from the City HR director that her firm is ageist, maybe it is a case of law deluding itself.

It is ageist while purporting not to be.

It pays lip service to the richness of experience that older entrants can bring, while, in many cases making it unwelcoming and impossible to enter.The law, as most professions, is budget-led; such hegemony of vision and balancing of costs may ultimately prove too shortsighted for its own good.Jacky Lewis is a freelance journalist