The Bar Vocational Course is supposed to be the door to a glamorous career as a barrister. But prospective students should look beyond the glitzy brochures, says Ekaterina Zelenova
It has been more than a month since I was called to the Bar, wigged and robed. For a day it felt as if I’d made it, after all those years of hard work. The feeling didn’t last long, though. I am one of many unfortunate Bar Vocational Course (BVC) graduates without a pupillage.
I started applying for pupillages at the end of my Bachelor of Laws. I suppose I was quite naive at that point. I thought that my 2:1 degree, a major Inns of Court scholarship, a couple of modern languages and 11 mini-pupillages would at least get me some interviews. They didn’t.
I made another set of applications this year — at the end of the BVC, which I did in Manchester — following the advice of a more successful friend by submitting everything well before the deadline. On top of this, I visited a careers adviser on a weekly basis and regularly read law-related articles. All I achieved, however, was one unsuccessful first-round interview. Three months later, I’m still chasing the feedback.
So, having been jobless for two months, I have ended up with a data-entry position at the funeral services division of a company whose name I won’t mention here. Not quite what I had in mind this time last year.
Why the Bar?
When it came to choosing my degree subject, law seemed like a worthy course to take, but I never seriously considered becoming a lawyer at first. Several work placements and mini-pupillages later, and I changed my mind, deciding to pursue a career at the Bar.
It was for the usual reasons, outlined at length in the various application forms I’ve completed: independence, advocacy, intellectual challenges and a desire to help others. The BVC was everything I expected it to be, apart from what happens afterwards. It was hard work, but I enjoyed every minute and found the whole experience quite inspiring — especially the dinners (or qualifying sessions) at the Inns.
When I finally accepted the fact that I was not going straight into a pupillage after the course, I consoled myself with the idea that no employer would be able to resist my application. I envisioned myself getting a paralegal job at some top firm, gaining relevant experience, making useful contacts and paying off my debts. However, things haven’t quite work out that way.
Apparently, you need at least six months’ experience to be a paralegal. Otherwise, I was told, you are not a profitable candidate for legal recruitment agencies. When I somehow managed to get a second interview at a local solicitors’ firm for a commercial paralegal position, my interviewers raised concerns about me becoming bored by the mundane administrative tasks involved in the job. A month later I discovered that they had recruited someone else with ‘more experience’.
When I lowered my standards and applied for legal secretarial jobs, which I’d done at law school and swore I would never do again, my applications were turned down because I was ‘overqualified’. At that point, I felt like removing my degree and other qualifications from my CV. Then the funeral services job suddenly came up.
All I do now is sit in an office without windows, type numbers into a computer and try to deal as politely as I can with rude callers on the phone. Still, at least I’m enhancing my diligence, attention to detail, interpersonal, organisational and team-working skills — well, that is what my CV says, anyway. One thing that is for sure is that this sort of job is a real eye-opener. I have certainly heard a few depressing life stories. And their effect is to make me more determined than ever to pursue a career in law — preferably, at the Bar.
Looking back, sometimes it seems like the BVC was not such a great investment. All I have managed to get in return so far is a minimum wage job, which I am not too fond of, and a large slice of spiralling debt from a career development loan.
On the other hand, I have developed all the advocacy, conference, negotiation and analytical skills listed in the BVC providers’ brochures. Unfortunately, no-one seems to care about these things. And, from a broader perspective, the worrying thing is that I am not the only one. Among my BVC friends, only a couple were able to secure pupillages and very few people I know have even landed paralegal jobs.
As difficult as it is to remain optimistic at this stage, I’m not planning to give up just yet. But then neither are the thousands of other ‘non-practising barristers’ out there, I imagine.
When I am feeling more positive, I contemplate how I can make the most of my ‘years out’ before pupillage, should I ever secure one. It seems like pupillage committees look for unusual things in candidates, so I guess the funeral services job is a microscopic step in the right direction.
At some point I will probably re-write my CV and undertake a second round of cold-calling to solicitor firms, which I am not looking forward to. I may also try my luck again with the Legal Practice Clerks www.lpc-law.co.uk — which employs Legal Practice Course and BVC graduates in advocacy and clerking roles — having been unsuccessful after a dreadful telephone interview first time around. Then I will write some more time-consuming and nerve-wracking pupillage applications. And, of course, there’s always Plan B — qualifying as a solicitor. But before that I must at least get a paralegal job.
According to the message in all those dramatic barrister success stories you read about in course providers’ brochures, if you want it enough, you will get a pupillage, become a QC and get into the House of Lords. Let’s hope that it isn’t just some meaningless BVC advertisement.
What a scandalous waste of training and talent. Government policies are forcing thousands of untrained litigants in person to represent themselves. At the same time the likes of Miss Zelenova are unable to put their hard-earned legal skills to use. Can't Afford a Lawyer is an attempt to right these two wrongs.
This article infuriates me.
The tone of it is that the author has somehow been duped into spending her money on the BVC, as if a guaranteed job was waved in her face and then snatched away. I have seen the same attitude in many other bitter jobless BVC grads.
Well no, that wasn’t what happened. What happened was that the author knew, as everyone taking on the BVC knows, that one in five applicants gets a pupillage (or, at the time the author would have started the BVC, it may have been one in three). That is, the average BVC graduate does not get pupillage, yet people are shocked when they discover that the statistics may not go in their favour. This doesn’t seem to have even occurred to them as a possibility.
As a BVC graduate myself I understand the frustration of rejection, but I accept that this was a risk that I willingly took, and that nobody owes me a career at the Bar. Further, although I have so far been unsuccessful, I do at least have a first-class degree from a good red-brick university. Bright, articulate friends of mine who would love to be barristers have decided against it because they have 2:1s, mindful of the awful statistics.
There is no way that I would have undertaken the risk if I had a 2:1 from the university from which the author hails (having Googled her). I cannot find evidence of a single barrister with a 2:1 from the author’s uni who attained pupillage in the past ten years, which is surely something that someone should investigate before assuring themselves that they are more deserving of pupillage than the great majority of applicants. And if the author is expecting either (a) a non-criminal pupillage or (b) a London pupillage then she is even more arrogant.
The author says chambers don’t care about skills – well actually they do, by reference to your marks in uni (academic ability/intelligence) and BVC grade (practical skills). If her supposed superior skills are not evidenced by her CV then how precisely does she propose that chambers should work out her superiority to everyone else?
I just get so annoyed by people thinking that the statistics are of no relevance to them, because they are 'special', and they really want it, and/or it’s their 'dream'. Guess what - all of us really really want to be barristers, and all of us think we would be really good. Having something as your 'dream' doesn’t entitle you to it any more than anyone else. And as far as I’m aware good barristers take responsibility for their own decisions and don’t blame extraneous factors for their failures.
Regarding 'annoyed pupillage seeker's' comments, you appear to be annoyed at the fact you perceive Ekaterina's comments to indicate that she is more deserving or superior to others. The fact you think you're in a position to be annoyed by her suggests that really, despite your comments, you also think that you're more desrving than she. That is the nature of the 'pecking order': it's often the people who fail to achieve their goals that look for other 'bigger failures'. In this case, you've yet to secure pupillage but are at least 'taking responsibility'. The fact is that there will be some people who read the post and find it informative - there is a huge problem with people failing to realise just how difficult securing pupillage is. Statistics are meaningless - if one in five people get a pupillage but four in five people at Bar school have sub-par grades, then one's chances are pretty good. The fact is that many people won't appreciate the competition until they meet it, which for some won't be until they have already started Bar school. Scholarships, whilst useful, often in my opinion give people false hope: they think that having secured a scholarship post-interview they must be in the running for a pupillage interview, which simply isn't the case. The thing that people should bear in mind is that ultimately it isn't really about whose more deserving than whom; each year there are a handful of people who are guaranteed pupillage, and these are the people with a 1st from Oxbridge with at least a few papers in which they came in the top three of the year, an LLM from Harvard or another Ivy league, have been published, have solid work experience and have won a known moot competition, an essay writing competiton and have been awarded a top scholarship (as distinct from a major scholarship). These people will get interviews at every set they apply for and will probably have multiple offers. For everybody else, there's little between who gets picked and who doesn't - it's more about luck than anything else. That's not to say that there aren't sub-par people at Bar school, but more that the market is saturated with equally well-rounded individuals. A few years ago I got feedback from a top set - they had around two to three hundred applicants, of which about 40/50 had a first class degree, and they only interviewed 15/20 people. So whilst your red-brick 1st may distinguish you from Ekaterina's 2:1 in another profession, in the eyes of the Bar, neither of you are likely to be in the top 40 applicants and few chambers interview more than 30 people in the first round. Thus you are no less naive than the poster.
This is a refreshingly accurate picture of what the BVC route even for very able, candidates, provides you with at the end. The Bar Council should read the remarks carefully.
The introduction of OLPAS has many advantages, however the biggest is that it has reduced the first stage of application to a near lottery.
The profession needs to reassess the entry route, 5 times as many people undertake the long path to the bar as those who succeed. 80% of those people are academically able, highly motivated, trying everything they can to enhance their prospects and create their own luck. The sad reality is that as described in the article, your BVC qualification does not facilitate alternative routes or fallback options as one might hope for such an investment of money, hardwork and enthusiasm.
Accurate statistical data on how many apply to BVC, how many suceed and in what time frame, where the rest go as alternatives has not been readily available. Even BVC providers in many cases cannot tell you how many of their students gain pupillage.
As for naivety, there are those with a 2.2 who are kidding themselves. However there are also many hundreds of applicants who have high 2.1 and ask all the appropriate questions. They evaluate the risk as best they can with the infomration available. They are always told "it will be difficult but absolutely possible, you will get there if you work hard enough". Firstly. BVC teaching institutions don't want to be blunt and tell people they are not good enough. Secondly, they probably can't because they need to have as many people as possible on the course to generate fees. Thirdly the bar is currently obsessed with diversity. This has meant that chambers and colleges cannot be blunt about how certain universities and schools affect the success of an application.
Unlitmately the Bar needs to manage this process more sensibly. Dramtically cut the numbers taking the course - introduce preliminary assessments to do this.
Ekaterina, your frustration with the lack of opportunity at the Bar is entirely understandable. You've wasted time and money on a course which has set you up for nothing but a dead-end job (no pun intended). But you must have known your chosen career was fraught with danger.
Even if I had been naive (which I undoubtedly was leaving uni), I might have done a quick risk-reward analysis of trying for the Bar. Look at who makes it - do you genuinely think you compare?
Here's the rub. Tempted by a previous comment, I also had a quick Google. The bias towards established universities may well be unfair, but it's the reality. I'm sure you're bright and well qualified, and perhaps you slipped through the clutches of the better universities, but as it stands your alma mater simply doesn't cut the mustard for the Bar. Even if the committees are looking for 'unusual things', these will always be backed up the exceptional academics you lack.
And in my experience, you'll find that law firms take a similar approach.
To the person who posted below me – no, I am not as naïve as the poster and no, the fact that I “feel in a position to be annoyed” does not logically mean I think I am more deserving of pupillage – it is a complete non-sequitur. Please read my post properly before commenting. The point I was making was that despite the fact that my academics are better and hence I arguably have better grounds for feeling peeved, I would not dream of blaming the BVC providers for my misfortune, or moaning about having to do an “ordinary” job, as if I have a divine right to pupillage. I don’t. If you go around talking as if you have an entitlement to pupillage, as the author does, then you are in effect saying that you are undoubtedly superior to at least 80% of pupillage applicants. I am not arrogant enough to claim that, and I feel I have better grounds for doing it than does the author with her 2.1 from a relatively poor uni given that there are loads of people with 2.1s from my uni who have got pupillages in the past ten years, let alone firsts. I actually went to the bother of researching my chances before plunging into the BVC and I think anyone who doesn’t is either beyond naïve or beyond arrogant. If the author was naïve and/or arrogant enough to believe that a 2.1 from a very average uni would guarantee her a pupillage then frankly I don’t see why that is anyone’s fault but her own. If you can’t do this most simple of research tasks, if you act without thinking rationally about your chances of success and if you are unable to take responsibility for your own actions, I doubt a glittering career at the Bar awaits. I may well not get a pupillage – my attitude is that I knew this when I started out, and so would anyone who had the basic sense to make the most superficial of investigations. I am taking my chances. Nobody forced me to.
And as a postscript, again directed to the poster beneath me above, although it is not actually relevant to the point I am making, it is simply not true to say that someone with a 2.1 from a relatively poor university is in no worse position than someone with a 1st from a good red brick. It is simply not the case that all chambers only interview people with Oxbridge firsts! That is nonsense. And are you seriously saying that someone with, say a 1st from LSE, would be in no better a position than someone with say a 2.1 from London Met? Rubbish, and you know it.
I find myself in perfect agreement with the tone of the previous posts. I haven't even finished university, but despite having had some solid legal experience with a London chambers and a very solid academic record I long ago realised that attempting to become a barrister was not a pragmatic choice. I know several people who have completed the BVC and are in similar situations, and have been for a while. The reason for the problem, apart perhaps from the shortcomings of those in charge, is that becoming a barrister today is subject to extreme competition, but it also tends to attract those particularly determined (but alas not very realistic) types. I don't intend this as a sexist comment, but from personal experience it also tends to me women. I think men are maybe more pragmatic when it comes to career choices post LLB?
It was clear even in 2000 that the Bar was difficult to get into. It has become more and more difficult since and even the most cursory review of legal sources or even the major broadsheets would have made this clear. I know many very well qualified lawyers - both academically and in terms of their advocacy skills - who did not consider the bar due to the very slim chances of securing pupillage, let alone tenanacy.
Yes, literally it has become my funeral now for taking the BVC.
Guys, guys... I can see where all of you are coming from, especially the Annoyed Seeker. I'd like to say, however, that the article also highlights the difficulties in securing paralegal jobs experienced by many BVC and LPC graduates. I really enjoyed the practical side of the course and I would like to practise law - what's so unreasonable about that?
I'll reserve comments about my university. Looking back, I wish I'd gone somewhere else. But at the time of applying, I didn't even consider a career in law, let alone becoming a barrister.
Thanks so much for your comments!
Ekaterina,
I’m sorry to come across so strongly but it is the culmination of listening for a year to people in the same position feeling sorry for themselves! I am currently attempting to dissuade a good friend of mine from bringing legal proceedings against the Bar Council for allowing her to take the BVC. If I were her, there is no way I would have taken it. I remember her asking me to read her OLPAS form last time round as she was sure she was missing some magic sentence in the “why I want to be a barrister” section, as she had received no interviews the previous year. It didn’t even occur to her that with her 65% from an ex-poly she might just not be in the top 20% of applications received by chambers. I just don’t understand how people can be so confident that they are better than 80% of other applicants, unless they literally have the CV to end all CVs. To me it is either extreme naivety or extreme arrogance. I personally don’t feel I have the right to feel “done out” of a pupillage, so I don’t understand people who do, especially when their CVs make them statistically even less likely to succeed than me. The tone of your article suggested that you felt that this was a sorry state of affairs caused entirely by the “system”. As to your university – again, not trying to have a go at you, I’m not saying chambers SHOULD discriminate on basis of uni grades/university attended – just that they DO, and in these circumstances it is something people applying to the Bar need to assess before diving in.
I wish you the best of luck in finding a pupillage.
Forgive me for being slow however, it appears to me that the author does not actually state which University she completed her law degree at. She only states the institution where she completed her BVC. If I am wrong, can someone please inform me which University she attended so that I can research the pupillage statistics for myself?
Related Articles
Latest Jobs
