Career Clinic: Can I jump to the front of the job queue with a shorter TC ?

It's not that common. I had some mates who had done the Bar and so knocked off six months from the TC. I doubt it will be a problem if you know for certain what practice area you would like to do and you think that you will be offered a job there. Otherwise, it's probably better to do an extra seat and extend your options with experience in another practice area. In any event I don't think you need to or should make a decision this early in your TC.

Associate -29 Jan 2009 | 08:56

The bottom line is you would be asking your firm to pay you a NQ salary when it could pay you a trainee's salary for another six months. Not sure that proposal would be well received at the moment. Instead, it may just demonstrate your lack of awareness of the impact of the current business environment.

Anonymous -29 Jan 2009 | 11:13

I am a March NQ who had time cut off from my training contract. It has pros and cons, at the moment for me the NQ market isn't great, but by the time you qualify it may be better.You need to be absolutely sure of the area you wish to qualify into. Also the firm you are at may not agree to you having your time cut off even if you want to, as it is discretionary upon on the firm you are at. You will have to make a good business case. Best of luck!

Anon March NQ -29 Jan 2009 | 13:18

Reducing the time spent in formal training is only worthwhile where you have no alternative. It would be more acceptable for a back door qualifier than someone who has followed the traditional path to qualification. If you so decide to go down the route of seeking time knocked off the contract, it is likely to be raised at each interview that you attend for the next five years. Why create a potential barrier to future employment? Use the remainder of the contract to gain exposure to different areas of law to that in which you already have experience and get to know as many of the partners as you can as this will help to secure a job.

A bad idea -29 Jan 2009 | 13:51

This is not the economic climate to be an NQ - best stick to the security of a TC. I also agree that you need to know without a shadow of a doubt which area you want to qualify into and the TC is designed to help you make this decision. Perhaps consider a secondment to diversify your experience.That said, I had six months taken off and am really pleased that it was approved as I had been a paralegal for many years and wanted to benefit from qualification as soon as possible.If in doubt, stick to the two years. Now is not the time to take risks.

Anonymous -29 Jan 2009 | 13:52

I qualified a few years ago and got six months knocked off my TC. Pros: you get to earn NQ money sooner and can start life as an NQ sooner too. Cons: You immediately become more expensive for your firm, the job market is tricky now (although it might be better when you qualify) and it gives you less time to decide what area you want to qualify into - I had to make a decision when I'd been a trainee for a year and had only done two seats, as my TC was only 18 months long after six months was knocked off. Plus life is pretty stressful right after qualification! If I had my time again I'd stick with the two-year training contract unless you have personal/financial reasons or a strong business case to qualify early. Good luck.

Anonymous -29 Jan 2009 | 13:53

I agree with the other posters that this is not a good idea in the current market (unless you have been a paralegal for years, in which case I can understand your urgency). NQs are not safe from redundancy mainly because firms are willing to let you qualify to maintain their qualification rates, choosing instead to boot you out six months later. Now is the best time to be a trainee - easier hours and a safe haven from the ever-increasing number of redundancy initiatives being undertaken. Why not use the six months to do a client/international secondment? I'm sure your experience would give you a good chance of securing something interesting.

MC trainee -29 Jan 2009 | 15:29

Good balanced comments above. I would add that your prior work experience is worth also taking into account. Have your previous role(s) provided you with genuinely sufficient skills and experience to be confident of skipping the final six months of your training contract? Perhaps more importantly, are you sure that the prior work experience is marketable enough to ensure you have a better then average chance of finding a new job if you're not kept on after qualification at your firm? If in doubt, my recommendation would be that you stick to the traditional route of a two year training contract as generally the legal profession doesn't like diversions from what is not 'usual'.

MG -29 Jan 2009 | 16:22

The problem is with taking time to count is that once the forms are approved by the SRA you have to shorten the training contract, even if your firm suddenly announces there is no NQ position for you. My advice is to be absolutely certain there is a job before making the application. If there is no NQ position, then I would rather sit tight as a trainee for another seat than have to go out searching for an NQ position with a new firm.

Regional trainee -30 Jan 2009 | 16:16

If you do nothing, then you will do the usual two years, and you will be considered with everyone else qualifying. Why you are thinking of stepping forward and applying to do a shorter training contract? You are drawing attention to yourself, and putting your firm to the trouble of thinking about you, an accelerated training period, and making a position available for you at NQ when nobody else is. It's not whether you will get ahead of your peers, because I see no positives in your proposal. Saving six months on your TC, especially in this economic climate, seems to me senseless. Enjoy your TC, use all of that time wisely, and learn as much as you can now while you are allowed to make mistakes in the process. The firm might allow you to shorten your TC, only to tell you on or shortly after qualification that you're being made redundant. If you're good, you will be kept on. M

May -30 Jan 2009 | 16:33

The Training Principal needs to decide a) whether you previous experience is at the same level of a Trainee and b) if you are good enough to qualify early. As a first seater you might think you are brilliant, but it is too early to tell, so you should wait until at least your third seat.

Anonymous -30 Jan 2009 | 16:51

Although I agree that the original poster might be wise to do the full two-year TC in the current economic climate, I'm quite surprised by the tone of some of the posts on the thread. There really is no difference in the way shortened TCs are viewed in comparison to two-year TCs and, frankly, whenever you qualify it is always a bit of a scramble to find a job on qualification. Try and give the original poster some credit for asking a sensible question and stop being so risk averse!

Anonymous -01 Feb 2009 | 15:20

Why would you want to reduce your TC? This makes absolutely no sense at all. You will gain less experience, and all future employers will ask you why you did a shorter TC. Not to mention the job market is such that you will most likely be heading to unemployment quicker. Just because firms tell you that there will be a position available at qualification does not mean you should trust that statement blindly, since with the current economy lots of firms are going back on their promises. I understand that some people feel the need to stand out of the crowd, but this is the wrong way to stand out.

Anonymous -02 Feb 2009 | 15:51

To the person who posted the latest comment: you need to wake up and smell the latte. I know plenty of lawyers (myself included) who did a shortened TC and have never been asked about it at interview.

Anonymous -02 Feb 2009 | 18:35

It would be very dangerous for the poster to act on a "I've done it so can you" type of argument. These are very different times. And no law firm is hiring (prima donnas or otherwise). The egoist who wants to stand from the crowd will likely be the first to be shown the door. The poster can decide for him/herself whether he should be partaking in the coffee or throwing it down the sink.

May -04 Feb 2009 | 16:18

I have knocked off six months from my training contract, so that I qualify at the end of this month. My decision was made to apply for this at the very beginning of my TC, so I think you are wise to think about it now, ie if your previous experience is that great then you should plan ahead, and if it is not then don't bother. There are two of us at my firm who will be qualifying at the end of the month, and we are both being kept on. I think we have been lucky because those who qualify in September have to battle it out with each other, if there are limited jobs, and right now our firm is prepared to take a punt, whereas in six months when a recession may be more advanced, they may not be able to do so. Think hard about whether your experience really warrants a six-month reduction, and you MUST know where you want to qualify. If you have really good previous experience and know where you want to qualify then you should take to your firm about it. If they are not keen then you could always leave it there - on the other hand, if you let it slide, you look like you haven't got much foresight. Good luck

Anonymous -04 Feb 2009 | 16:21