The SRA's recognition of paralegals is most significant

What an incredible eight months. At the end of 2013, paralegals were still in the shadows. Now the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is theoretically willing to allow paralegals to qualify without an LLB, the LPC or a training contract.

A House of Commons Select Committee and the Civil Justice Committee have sought the paralegal view. The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) has launched its paralegal enquiry. The Institute of Paralegals (IOP) is workingon the professional paralegal register. Trailblazer legal apprenticeships have been introduced. There is an explosion in the number of alternative business structures (ABSs) largely staffed by paralegals. Official support for the extension of the use of McKenzie Friends has been voiced, and the Legal Education Foundation is now offering to fund paralegal-related projects.

Of these, the SRA’s recognition of alternatives to the academic, vocational and training contract qualification requirements is most significant.

Its reforms have been warmly welcomed by paralegals. They are seen as a significant move away from the previous, and frankly rather mechanistic, focus on complying with a process. Now we have a regime, more concerned with competency. Under the old process-driven regime personal circumstance, wealth and age were more important factors in qualifying than skill, passion, dedication or professionalism.

Paralegals see this change as a positive thing of course, even those for whom it is not personally relevant (not all nurses want to be doctors, not all paralegals want to be solicitors). They still welcome it because it is a further step towards the greater recognition of paralegals generally.

Younger paralegals believe the system now better reflects the much greater qualifications and legal practice experience options available.

Few paralegals expect training contract alternatives any time soon. They appreciate it will be extremely difficult to find employers (note the plural) willing to give sufficient training and/or experience (and to certify it for SRA purposes) given that they would be training staff to leave.

Much paralegal interest is focused on academic and vocational training alternatives. Like many, the IOP believes that SRA recognised alternatives to the LLB, GDL and LPC will be immensely popular. Expect innovation soon.

The new Trailblazer Legal Apprenticeships are interesting, but only time will tell if they are taken up in sufficient number to make a difference.

On the one hand, people generally don’t want youngsters advising them on their divorce or criminal charges, for example. But on the other hand, the apprenticeships address three perennial problems:

• employer complaints that the current qualification system is not fit for purpose (too often one hears employers complaining that they have to train LPC graduates from scratch);
• increasing diversity is hampered if the (graduate) pool of trainee candidates
• is itself insufficiently diverse; and
• employers need trained legal practitioners to undertake ‘simpler’ fee-earning work
• for which LPC graduates are overqualified.

Cumulatively these evolutions will not only bring about radical change, but also
act as harbingers of even greater change: they are the loose pebbles that start the
avalanche. SJ

James O'Connell is head of policy at the Institute of Paralegals