Westkin Associates

Our Services

Careers at Westkin Associates

Westkin are regulated by the SRA and provide specialist career paths for immigration Solicitors, we are also regulated by the IAA and provide training paths for our Lawyers to become immigration specialists, we also welcome applications from those with existing IAA qualifications.

Our Workplace Culture

Join our ever-growing team

We are a law firm that currently operates a remote first working policy, the vast majority of our Lawyers are working from home. We provide weekly training on immigration law to ensure our lawyers remain up to date with legal developments. Our weekly training also covers skills training, including client service, communication skills, technology and business training, as well as transferable skills such as time management and organisation best practice. Our aim is to develop our staff and we only encourage applications from those who enjoy lifelong learning

We also encourage applications from high quality personal immigration lawyers who wish to be retrained in business and corporate immigration law. There is strong competition for these positions, so early applications are encouraged. We also encourage applicants who are not yet ready to move but want an informal discussion to contact amir.zaidi@westkin.com.

We aim to ensure our workplace is both diverse and inclusive. We actively celebrate the role that people from different backgrounds can have in our firm and across the country.

  • Minority owned business,
  • Senior legal positions majority filled by women
  • Gay and Non Binary Staff
  • Clear policies and regular training on LGBTQ+, racial awareness and gender issues in the workplace.

We have a history of encouraging our staff to become involved with charity and we encourage applicants with a strong history of charitable involvement. We are currently supporting Migrateful with regular donations.

Careers at Westkin Associates

Build a career in immigration law.

We are a Mayfair immigration firm, regulated twice over by both the Immigration Advice Authority and the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

We act for individuals, families and businesses across the whole range of UK immigration work, from straightforward applications through to judicial review and Court of Appeal matters.

We are proud of our client care. The work is careful, done by qualified people who are given time to do it properly.

We are currently hiring into two roles.

Entry requirements are stated at the top of each role so nobody spends twenty minutes reading a position they cannot apply for.

Role 01

Immigration Caseworker / Solicitor

Entry requirement: a hard gate. You must hold IAA regulation at Level 1 or above, or be a qualified solicitor of England and Wales.

We cannot consider unregulated applicants for this role. If you are not yet regulated, the Immigration Advisor role below is the route in.

Location: Hybrid in London Salary: £40,000–£55,000 Type: Full-time, permanent

The role

You own the client's matter from instruction to outcome. Not a stage of it. The whole of it.

If you are a private client immigration lawyer

You know the family, settlement, nationality and human rights work inside out, and you want to add business and corporate immigration to it.

Sponsor licences, licence compliance, Innovator Founder, self-sponsorship and the wider business routes are where the firm is growing, and where Home Office enforcement activity is making the work both harder and more valuable.

We will train you into it properly rather than handing you a licence application and wishing you luck.

If you are a business immigration lawyer

You may be very good at sponsor licences, Certificates of Sponsorship, Skilled Worker and global mobility, and have noticed something about that work: a great deal of it is process at volume, most of it goes through, and a meaningful part of what you do each day is exactly the sort of work that is being systematised fastest.

What you may not have had much of is the complex end: refusals, administrative review, appeals, judicial review, human rights and Article 8 arguments, long residence, overstayers, deception allegations, and cases where the answer is genuinely uncertain and somebody has to make a judgement.

That is a large part of what we do, and we will train you into it.

We are one of a small number of immigration practices able to take judicial review work, and complex private client work is not a sideline here. It is the part of the practice the firm is known for.

If you have been quietly wondering whether your practice is broad enough to be durable, this is the conversation to have.

What you will do, either way

  1. Take detailed instructions and understand the client's circumstances properly, including the parts they have not thought to mention.
  2. Advise on the options genuinely open to them, and say plainly when an option is weak.
  3. Devise the strategy and own it.
  4. Prepare and submit applications; handle refusals, administrative review, pre-action correspondence and onward challenge where appropriate.
  5. Act as the client's lawyer throughout, and be the person they can actually reach.
  6. Work to the fee agreed at the outset.

What we require

A strong grounding on one side of the practice, private client or business, and a genuine appetite for the other.

We will want to see real depth somewhere. For private client applicants that means in-country and out-of-country work across the partner routes and their extensions, and ideally exposure to refusals and appeals.

For business applicants that means Skilled Worker and sponsor licence work of some volume, and ideally compliance or licence-jeopardy experience.

What you get

Weekly training, permanently. Every week, on immigration law and on the surrounding skills: client handling, communication, technology, business practice and organisation.

Immigration law changes several times a year and occasionally several times a month. A firm that trains annually is a firm running on last year's rules.

A deliberate cross-training path. Whichever direction you are coming from, moving across is the point of the role rather than something you fit in around a caseload.

Dual regulation. IAA and SRA together widen what you can take on, including judicial review.

Your own matters, properly resourced. We do not run three cases a day per fee-earner and we do not intend to start.

Role 02

Immigration Advisor

Our training position, leading to qualification as a solicitor or an IAA-regulated advisor.

Entry requirement: a law degree, GDL, LPC, or SQE study in progress or completed for those seeking the SRA route.

No immigration law experience required. No prior regulation required. We train and accredit you.

Location: London Type: Full-time, permanent

Salary: plus commission on new business signed. The commission scheme is set out in full at offer stage, including the fact that it does not begin until the three-month probation period is passed. We would rather you saw that here.

This role is built differently from a standard entry-level legal position, on purpose.

Our reasoning, and the research it rests on, is set out in the addendum at the end of this page.

Please read it before you apply. It explains what the role is for, and it is the fairest way for you to judge whether you agree with us.

What you will do

You are the first lawyer a client speaks to.

  1. Take first contact from people who have approached the firm by telephone, WhatsApp, email and web enquiry, and do it quickly. In this market the firm that answers first very often wins, and we treat that as a professional obligation rather than a sales tactic.
  2. Take instructions properly. Circumstances, immigration history, documents, dates, dependants, and the thing they have not told you yet.
  3. Diagnose. Work out which route or routes are genuinely open, whether any deadline is already running that the client has not noticed, and whether the case is strong, weak, or not yet ready.
  4. Advise, within your competence, and be exact about your confidence. We train a three-level model for this: what is on the page, your trained view marked as such, and what you will go and find out. The single rule is that you never leave an uncertain answer sounding certain.
  5. Scope and price the work, explain what the firm will do, and put the quote in writing.
  6. Ask for the instruction.
  7. Hand over to the caseworker who will run the matter, and stay involved.
  8. Record what happened honestly, including when we lost the client and why.
  9. Then the finishing-school part, where you will learn to process a case from start to finish using technology and your newly acquired client-management skills to ensure success.

Read this before you apply

When a client decides to instruct us, you are the person who asks them to. That is selling, and we are not going to call it something else.

It is not a call centre, it is not a script, and there is no cold calling. You speak to people who have contacted us. But the commercial element is real and it is a permanent part of the job, not a phase you are moved out of.

Our reasoning is in the addendum below. If, having read it, the commercial element is something you would resent, this is not the job for you, and we would far rather you concluded that now than in month three.

That is the same principle we apply to clients: we tell people when we are not the right answer for them.

The question you should be asking

Every firm offering a training route says the training is real. The only useful test is whether people have actually come out of the other end of it.

More than forty people have been trained through our programmes and gone on to practise.

Some are here now. Many are working elsewhere in immigration law, in this country and abroad, and some run their own practices.

This is not a route we are announcing. It is how this firm has staffed itself for years, and the Immigration Advisor role is the current version of it.

Ask about it at interview.

Qualifying as a solicitor

This role is qualifying work experience.

Under the SQE route you need two years' full-time equivalent qualifying work experience. It must involve providing legal services and give you the opportunity to develop competences from the SRA's Statement of Solicitor Competence.

It does not require a training contract, it can be accrued across up to four organisations, and it can be gained before, during or after you sit SQE1 and SQE2. It is confirmed by a solicitor of England and Wales, or by a compliance officer for legal practice.

The Immigration Advisor role meets that standard, and we say so having taken it through our own compliance officer and our senior lawyers rather than assuming it.

You take instructions, advise clients, identify routes, assess evidence and manage client relationships. That is legal services, performed under supervision, with the competences documented as you go.

Our commitments:

  1. Your QWE is recorded from day one, against the SRA competences, rather than reconstructed from memory two years later.
  2. It is confirmed by our compliance officer for legal practice.
  3. Supervision by named, qualified lawyers, structured around the competences you still need rather than whatever work happens to be in.

We have advisors on this route now.

And the IAA route, alongside it

You will also be accredited by the Immigration Advice Authority, funded by the firm.

That is a regulated qualification in its own right and it is the one that lets you advise. Until you are accredited your face-to-face client contact is supervised, a regulatory requirement we treat as a training asset rather than a formality.

Once accredited, your registration number goes in your email signature.

Some of our advisors qualify as solicitors. Some build a career as senior immigration advisors and never sit the SQE. Both are real destinations here and neither is the consolation prize.

Who this suits

Somebody who wanted to be a lawyer for the part where you help a person in serious trouble, and who has noticed what is happening to the work that juniors are traditionally hired to do.

Somebody who can be told they are wrong every week without it costing them anything. Somebody who can hold a difficult conversation without flinching or bulldozing.

Who it does not suit

Somebody who wants a purely back-office start. Somebody who would find "we are the firm that tells clients not to proceed" naive rather than commercially interesting.

Somebody looking for the traditional research-and-bundling apprenticeship. We think that apprenticeship is disappearing, which is the whole subject of the addendum.

The firm

Working here

Weekly training, permanently. On the law and on the skills the work needs.

We only encourage applications from people who enjoy learning continuously, because the alternative here is falling behind quickly.

Dual regulation. IAA and SRA. It widens the work and it raises the standard.

We promote from within by preference. Both routes onto this page are designed to lead somewhere, and we would rather grow a senior lawyer than buy one.

More than forty people have been trained through our programmes and gone on to practise.

Written standards. Our advisors work from a handbook that sets out what to say, why, and where the legal authority for it comes from, with the date each provision was last checked against legislation.gov.uk printed beside it.

If you have worked somewhere that runs on folklore, this will be a change.

Diversity and inclusion

We work hard to make this a firm where people from different backgrounds do well, and we think the record is a fair one: the firm is minority-owned, and most of our senior legal positions are held by women.

We run clear policies and regular training on LGBTQ+ inclusion, racial awareness and gender in the workplace.

We welcome applications from people currently under-represented in immigration practice, and we are happy to discuss adjustments at any stage. Just say so when you apply.

Applications

How to apply

Email recruitment@westkin.com with:

  • Your name, email address and telephone number
  • Your CV
  • A short covering note
  • The role you are applying for
  • Whether you currently hold IAA regulation or are SRA-qualified

If you are not ready to move but would like an informal conversation, write to amir.zaidi@westkin.com .

By sending us your details you agree to our privacy policy.

Immigration Advisor

Addendum: why the Immigration Advisor role is built this way

This is the part of a recruitment page that usually gets left out. We think leaving it out is why roles like this get mistrusted. The sources are cited at the end so you can check them rather than take our word for it, which is, more or less, the point.

Why the future of law means the training of lawyers needs to change

Richard Susskind has been making a single argument for the better part of forty years: that legal work will be broken into its component tasks, and that the routine components will first be standardised, then systematised, and eventually commoditised.

Writing with Daniel Susskind in The Future of the Professions, he extended it beyond law. The bargain society struck with the professions, in which experts hold a monopoly on practical expertise in exchange for making it available, comes under strain once machines can make that expertise available directly.

Daniel Susskind's later work pressed further on what that means for work itself. Richard Susskind's most recent book takes the same discipline to AI specifically.

You do not have to accept every conclusion to accept the direction of travel. We do not accept all of them.

The routine legal work that is disappearing is the same work junior lawyers have always learned on. It may not even be needed in a post-AI world once you have qualified.

Legal research.
First-draft documents.
Bundling.
Document review.
Chronologies.

These parts of the training contract were how you learned law: by doing the low-stakes parts of it badly, repeatedly, until you did them well.

The task-level evidence has said this for years, and it is far more focused than the headline "will AI replace lawyers" framing.

Frey and Osborne's occupational study put the probability of computerisation for lawyers at around 3.5%. For paralegals and legal assistants they put it at 94.5%.

Whatever one thinks of their method, and it has been criticised for scoring whole occupations rather than the tasks inside them, the gap between those two numbers is the entire story of what is happening to the bottom and junior end of the profession.

Remus and Levy reached the same shape from the other direction. Using data on how lawyers in large firms actually allocate their time, they found the automatable share concentrated in document review and routine drafting, while client counselling and advising were among the least susceptible.

Their overall estimate of the employment effect was much smaller than the headlines, and far more unevenly distributed.

More recent evidence sharpens the point rather than softening it. Brynjolfsson, Li and Raymond studied more than five thousand workers given access to a generative AI assistant and found the productivity gains concentrated among the least experienced. The most experienced saw only small gains in speed, and small declines in quality.

AI compresses the value of the kind of experience that can be written down.

If your competitive advantage as a junior lawyer was going to be that you had done something two hundred times and knew the format, that advantage is now available to somebody on their first day.

So a firm that automates the routine work and changes nothing else does not produce cheaper lawyers. It produces lawyers who have never had to sit with a frightened person and work out what is actually wrong.

What Westkin think survives

The economist David Autor made the useful observation, borrowing from Michael Polanyi, that we know more than we can tell.

The tasks that resist automation are the ones nobody can fully specify the rules for, and the reason they resist is not that the task is difficult but that the inputs are unstructured.

We think that describes the beginning of an immigration matter exactly.

Somebody contacts us in trouble. They tell you a story that is incomplete, sometimes wrong, and almost always missing the fact that matters most.

You have to work out which of dozens of routes they might be on. Whether a deadline is already running that they have not noticed. Whether the refusal letter they are describing says what they think it says. Whether the case is strong, weak, or premature.

And then you have to say the honest thing, including when the honest thing is wait, or you do not need a lawyer for this, or the firm that quoted you £900 has not read your refusal letter, clearly enough that a frightened person can act on it.

That is diagnosis, performed live, under uncertainty, with a regulator watching and no clean brief. Producing the clean brief is the work.

It cannot simply be handed to a system, because the system cannot be given the inputs.

So we start people there, rather than starting them on the tasks that are being automated and hoping the judgement arrives later.

As an interesting aside, it is the kind of approach used to train junior barristers: learn to think on your feet as you are training under live fire.

Where the selling comes in, and why it is in the same job

Because the conversation in which you diagnose someone's problem and the conversation in which they decide to instruct a firm are the same conversation.

Separate them and both get worse. The person who diagnoses has no stake in whether the advice was any good; the person who sells has not read the file.

Firms that split them end up with salespeople quoting fees on cases nobody has understood, and we know precisely what that looks like, because we compete with them and we clean up after them.

A firm that will tell you your case is weak is a firm you can believe when it says your case is strong.

That is an advantage a price-led firm structurally cannot copy, because it can only afford honesty when honesty happens to sell.

Our advisors are not penalised for a free review that comes back clean, and that is written into how the role is assessed, not just into how it is described here.

What we are not claiming

None of the authors cited below says that lawyers should sell. That conclusion is ours, and you should test it rather than accept it because there are footnotes underneath it.

Nor are we claiming to know the timescale. Frey and Osborne's method is contested. Remus and Levy wrote before large language models. Richard Susskind has been right about direction for four decades and wrong about speed more than once, which he says himself.

What we are confident about is narrower: the traditional junior apprenticeship is thinning, the firms that notice late will train a generation badly, and client-facing judgement is the last thing to go.

We would rather build the role around that and tell you we have done it than build it quietly and let you find out.

Sources

On qualifying work experience, see Solicitors Regulation Authority, Qualifying work experience, and The Law Society, Qualifying work experience (QWE).

Not ready to start your case?

Learn more about Special Visa Options, Life in the UK and how to select a Lawyer.

Download Free Info Pack