For those interested in branching out of the legal industry to completely unrelated areas, is there any advantage to practising law for say, between 1 to 3 years, before moving out?

Quite apart from the fact that one who decides not to remain in the legal industry after one's PTC ends cannot be truly said to have practised law, arguably there a former practising lawyer would bring along certain perspectives/insights/qualities that would appeal to organisations, even if his/her substantive knowledge might not be applicable?

The answer is: it depends.

What you get out of the 1 - 3 years in the industry is from what you put into it.

If you're the kind that's content to only draft wills and do simplified uncontested divorces...you tell us what sort of perspective/insight/quality you have then that appeals to organisations.

Everything can be repackaged for sale - that's what lawyers do after all. But only up to a point. If you haven't done anything with your life, it'll show.

Thanks all of you for the insights. I will be called in august but I will leave the industry and apply for a BD or account managerial role. I have spoken with a few seniors and I can safely conclude from our conversations that almost the entire legal industry will head towards a general hiring freeze save for a selected few depts from each firm (and those few spots are going to be extremely competitive).

I will read and learn more about BD roles and statistics during this time while I am sending my applications out. Good luck to the rest of you who are looking to leave the industry!

Absolutely agree with this. No matter what you do - it comes across so clearly when an individual has no life experience.

I got called and never held a PC. I earn an extremely low salary now.

That said, I have friends who have done very well for themselves with ineligible law degrees (recognised uni, grade too low) as in house counsel. I'm not sure why I failed to land any such roles despite being called but the lesson and answer to your question is, it doesn't really matter.

I would have to agree that it doesn’t really matter in the long run. But while you’re looking for jobs outside the industry, please read about the new roles as much as possible. Try to look at your CV and then point out the relevant skills you think can be applicable to the role. Everything can be repackaged. After you have done this and got the role, everything about law will be in the past and it won’t matter anymore. What matters is your performance in that role itself.

The answer above about "life experience" and "it depends" is a bad one. It really doesn't work that way.

When thinking about career moves, you should always think about it from the hirer's perspective. What value proposition do you bring to my org as a lawyer with 1-3 years of experience? I will give you an example. Say you are a M&A lawyer. A really good one. After 3 years, you decide you want to switch out and become a BD manager. You apply to my org. Do your 3 years of M&A experience mean anything? Straightforward answer: No. Even if I were to be planning an upcoming merger, something right up your alley, (1) it's not your job to handle the merger, and (2) if I really needed legal advice, I would consult my law firm. Not my BD manager.

Of course the situation is different if you are inhouse counsel, but we're discussing the case where one applies to a non-law related role.

Then the common response at this point is: "What about the soft skills that you have as a lawyer communication writing analytical skills bla bla bla". My answer is: Sure. You have that. But you're also expensive. If you're coming in as a 3PQE, will you accept a pay that's equivalent to a fresh grad? Probably not. But that's your value to me right now because you have no experience in the field. And fresh grads can also have those small skills. Even if you are willing to accept that, wouldn't I rather hire a fresh business graduate who already has some notion of business concepts from a degree that is somewhat related to the field?

In short, the longer you stay in law, the harder it is to get hired in a non-law field. Simple as that. If you wanna get out, get out earlier. This is anecdotal as well, have many friends who experienced the same. The most common way of pivoting out is apply to a good school, do a MBA. Then you can restart your career.

You don't need a PC to be in house counsel in Singapore.

There are a lot of factors that go into "success". Where you went to uni and your degree class are important factors, but not determinative.

I’m not the OP but to summarize the poster’s point - get out of law while you’re still a fresh grad. The longer you stay the harder it is to bridge the relevant experience and justify the career change. To many of you who thinking of quitting due to the current situation of the industry, my advice to you is, think carefully about the skills you have acquired from law school and your training. They can be applicable to the new role which you are applying to in many ways. You are still in a privileged position to quit the industry if you just got called.

Like many others, I didn’t quit law mainly because I could not accept a pay that is significantly lower than what I am earning. Unfortunately many of my peers share the same sentiment. If I were in that fresh grad position I would love to go into a new career altogether and I am confident the pay I would have in that MNC would be equal or marginally less than my current pay.

Mind sharing what you're doing now?