Career Clinic: Is my non-Russell Group first worth anything?

So which uni was it?

Annon -21 Sep 2009 | 11:03

I would have thought it is obvious that in the current market academics alone are not enough to secure a training contract!

I graduated this year with a strong 2:1 (68%) from a Uni ranked 50-60 in the Times List. I have had 5 assessment days/interviews for 2011 training contracts - two in London and three leading national firms.

This is because of my depth of work experience and extra curricular. I worked part time as a paralegal in my 3rd year, I have also done a vacation scheme in house with a global company and some pro bono work. Means you actually have something to talk about on the application form/interviews!

I have no legal connections whatsoever... I am a great fan of increasing diversity within the legal profession and from the people I have encountered in the City I would agree that securing a TC with a MC or top 15 firm is very unlikely unless you have been to a Russell Group uni.

However... if you were that determined you would have already acquired a wealth of work experience...

Man -21 Sep 2009 | 12:23

I really can't recommend doing the LPC without funding. I'll be paying off the debt for 10 years and I've had a salary cut. I'd be better off on the dole.

Anon -21 Sep 2009 | 13:00

The focus that law firms put on A-levels is excessive, restrictive and leads to City firms hiring more of the same drones. Yes, it doesn't really work but it's hard to see firms bothering with anything more imaginative.

Anonymous -21 Sep 2009 | 13:12

Mr

I agree with the above poster (the second poster) in some respects. The need to have a fully rounded CV with legal, non-legal work experience and extracurricular activities is vital.

However, this is all trite to state. I graduated with a First from a non-Russell group University (albeit one which is 'traditional' and well respected); and secured a TC with a large national firm. I think perseverance is key - whilst you should not aim for MC/US/top 10 if your University and degree class do not 'fit' with that pedigree - the employers ACTUALLY want the best candidates; of which academics is only one, though fairly major, consideration.

My advice to you would be to apply for work experience (be it formal vac schemes of otherwise) and TCs at a slightly larger range of firms. Think firms within the top 20-40. You may find that after doing work experience for these (sometimes) less academically snobby firms, you may find that you don't need to apply to firms that have the 'prestigious' name to find the kind of training and prospects you desire.

In all, you shouldn't give up applying to where you really want to work; as long as you can demonstrate that the cumulative value of your CV matches the places you are applying to. Whilst a First from a non-traditional Uni holds less weight, it is still an impressive achievement.

National Firm -21 Sep 2009 | 13:16

Mr

Also; some details of which University you attended and your relevant work experience may help to consider your chances. Further - have you had feedback from any of the firms you have applied to? They may be able to give you some sort of reason for being unsuccessful.

National Firm -21 Sep 2009 | 13:18

That's the way the...

It may seem harsh, but realistically this is unfortunately one consequence of such varying standards. As some posters have said, from a weak university you really need to compensate with outstanding extracurriculars.

Cookie Crumbles -21 Sep 2009 | 15:44

The problem is that for those selecting interview candidates in particular, trying to select a small number from a huge pile of applications, bad A-level results is a very easy way to reduce the size of the pile.

In the current climate everything on the CV has to be right. A first from a second or third tier uni might not be a problem, but duff A-level results will be. The problem is that for those selecting interview candidates in particular, trying to select a small number from a huge pile of applications, bad A-level results is a very easy way to reduce the size of the pile.

You say that the bad results were "for one reason or another." Putting it bluntly, there is no reason for an employer to take a risk that one of the reasons still pertains and may have an impact on your performance.

RJ -21 Sep 2009 | 16:30

I'm not sure a First really carries much weight unless it comes from a top university - if anything I'd expect a hard-pressed HR department to see it as confirming their expectation that the sort of university you can get into with poor A-levels gives out Firsts to candidates who aren't that good. Even if they aren't prejudiced this way, Firsts can be discriminated against for being too lawyerly (I've been told by a former boss in-house that I wouldn't have been interviewed had my CV had a First on it).

A bit of good relevant work experience would make a big difference, particularly if you can get a decent reference out of your supervisor "undoing" the First by showing your potential professional skills.

Law grads even from "top" universities are ten a penny so you need something to make you stand out beyond your First.

It is worth applying for the larger commercial firms in the regions as well as the big London and national firms, as long as you can demonstrate some link or affinity with the area they are in. Having recently recruited from our trainees for a NQ post, we don't seem to have a problem with well-qualified candidates from new universities.

AB -21 Sep 2009 | 16:59

A few thoughts. To begin with, a very well done on achieving a first, you should be very proud of this and should not be second guessing yourself about it.

I also got a first from a non-Russell Group uni (graduated in 2008), in fact probably a worse reputation than your university as it only fits into the bottom 20 of the Times ranking list!

Subsequent to this I have obtained a TC at a top 15 law firm (starting 2011) and have just completed my LLM at a Russell group university.

My experience was very positive during interviews at firms and at no time did I get a sense that it really mattered that I was not from a Russell Group university. Interviewers seemed genuinely impressed that I had a first even though it was not from a top-tier university.

What I did do though to try and increase my chances of securing a TC was to try and obtain experience that was not necessarily at a firm but rather experience that improved my business acumen. So for example I worked in-house at a bank. This seemed to count for a lot and I really believe it gave me a genuine advantage over other candidates as many of the questions I was asked at interviews revolved around my (very limited) business experience and other extracurricular activities.

You are right to worry about the expense of the LPC and possibly with the current recession it would be best to wait until you have a TC before you embark on the LPC.

Nevertheless I would keep going, keep believing in yourself and plug the first as a tremendous achievement rather than worrying about the fact that it was not obtained at a Russell Group university.

Anonymous -21 Sep 2009 | 17:49

Which university is traditional and well respected and not in the Russell Group?

Bonjovi -22 Sep 2009 | 09:10

Man oh man...

Don't listen to Man - he seems more than a little full of himself, particularly given that he has yet to start his no doubt glittering career in the City.

I met several people with non-Russell Group Firsts on the LPC who had MC training contracts. Yes, you do need to show something beyond pure academics, but a First from almost anywhere should get you at least a look-in at any firm if your applications are good enough and you have something to say about yourself beyond "look at my First". If in doubt, call the grad recruitment manager before applying and explain your circumstances. I imagine they'll be only to happy to receive your application, but at least you'll save yourself 5 hours + on the application form if they they're not interested.

Good luck!

Herman -22 Sep 2009 | 09:35

Bonjovi: Traditional and well respected but non Russell Group could include Durham, Exeter, St Andrews, Surrey, Queen Mary London and a number of others... the Russell Group is an association of the largest research universities and not all well regarded universities would fit their criteria for membership.

lawlib -22 Sep 2009 | 11:06

Technically it should not make a difference what university you got your degree at in the UK unless Scottish (you need a Scots law degree to go to the Scottish Bar!). Basically, you get the same 10-12 core subjects with choice options: you use the same tomes, it's roughly the same exams, and your tutors/lecturers may be Oxford/Cambridge/Kings/Edin/Glasgow ie Russell Group - so why would you not secure a TC with a first over someone else with a 2:2?! Plus, you may be wondering given you have not had an uptake for a TC that perhaps some firms taking up to 50% non-LLB degree in any event may actually be depriving good quality students who actually did study law.

ANON -22 Sep 2009 | 14:01

Bonjovi,
Take a look at www.1994group.ac.uk
If you wish to curb your ignorance.

National Firm -22 Sep 2009 | 14:55

Degree results are often the opposite of A level results

It is well known in academia that the highest University grades are often achieved by the students who did not get the highest grades at A level for their intake. The smartest ones often kick back thinking their A-levels will carry them through, often to a safe 2:1. Whereas those, who like you, worked hard can get the 1st.

I'm at a top US firm and a close colleague of mine got top marks in their degree at a very mediocre Uni (one far from the Russell Group - chosen for personal reasons). Proven ability with a rounded CV is what counts. The problem is you are in a market where you are up against students with top marks at every stage. It is tough, but there will be a TC out there for you.

Anon -22 Sep 2009 | 16:15

As someone who regularly interviews people applying for TCs at a large commercial firm, I can say your degree is definitely a plus.

Many firms use A-levels as an initial filter to cut the number of applications down to a manageable size for more detailed review - we get about 3,000 a year, and we apply such a filter, but there is scope to put in an explanation for poor A-level results.

What you really do need is evidence that there is more to you than academic achievement. Relevant (legal or commercial) work experience, extra-curricular activities at Uni, anything to show you are serious and committed about what you are applying for.

And when you get to interview, you'll find it goes a lot easier if there's stuff on your form to talk about - as an interviewer I often struggle to find anything interesting to discuss.

John -22 Sep 2009 | 17:04

Wow. I'm surprised so many of you who conduct interviews at top firms are willing to look at lower-ranked unis. I worked like a pig at A-level and at uni to get ABB and a high 2.1 (69%). I even won the first-year mooting competition, was on the mooting team, played sport, and had great vacation experience at an MC firm and overseas. I spoke 2 EU languages apart from English. I applied to over 100 firms for a TC and got not one interview. Career office at uni said my applications/CV were fine and that I was just unlucky. This was over 7 years ago and I've been doing admin at the local job centre ever since.

Jason Smith -22 Sep 2009 | 23:11

Jason Smith's post is surely a joke. There's no one that could have that profile doing a lowly office admin job unless they have sex convictions they're not mentioning.

Anonymous -23 Sep 2009 | 11:49

Jason Smith is probably telling the truth - there are law grads who are seriously intelligent but not being picked up - and there are lots of seriously not intelligent law grads being picked up for training contracts.

ANON -23 Sep 2009 | 16:54

I'm not lying. I quit looking about two years ago. The few times I've spoken to law firm partners - one at Bryan Cave I recall - I was told that I don't stand a chance. Great academics they say, but we are looking for experience, and you should have obtained a good firm job a years ago, not now. I've been told even the common law or criminal bar would not be an option since, despite good grades and substantial mooting experience, I didn't practice law immediately (and that's because I couldn't find a TC). I had one barrister tell me I more than had the ability and skills to succeed at the bar, but that most chambers, like firms, are more interested in ticking the boxes over getting someone who'd be a good lawyer. I have to admit, I do get jealous when I hear of 2.2 grade students or 2.1ers from former polys getting big firm TCs.

Jason Smith -24 Sep 2009 | 01:04

Bonjovi, are you serious? Do you really think that all the 20 Russell Group universities are better than all those not in it? In all courses?

anon -24 Sep 2009 | 10:45

Not much

A first from an ex-polytechnic is worth a low 2.2 from a real university. It's a shame no-one told you to retake your A-levels and try again.

The problem is that you've spent the last three years being taught by, and socialising with, people who just aren't very able.

Anon -25 Sep 2009 | 10:20

I hate to agree with Bonjovi, but the Russell Group are the best universities in the country containing some of the best universities of the world!

Anonymous -25 Sep 2009 | 12:16

Above poster; nowhere in his question does the OP state that he went to an ex-poly; only that he went to a non-Russell group Uni with a pretty average reputation.

Unfortunately this description is, granted, very vague, and it may be reasonable to infer that he went to an ex-poly. This sort of question hinges somewhat on the OP telling us which Uni he attended. He has not, so a reasoned discussion of how a grad recruitment drone would see his degree's worth is difficult.

National Firm -25 Sep 2009 | 12:46

What basis do people have for these airy claims about the blanket superiority of those who went to Russell Group universities? In my time, I've worked with people who had first-rate academics but proved to be intellectually bog-standard. Conversely, one of the most smartest people I've ever met scrapped out of a third-rate university (he was a drug-fuelled slacker in his earlier years). I find it bizarre the notion that the only yardstick of intellectual worth is what you did from the ages of 16 to 21, which will be heavily impacted by your environment anyway.

Anonymous -25 Sep 2009 | 14:08

Jason Smith, I suspect that your applications were just a bit rubbish. I applied during my final year to firms near the bottom of the top 100 list (and outside the top 100) and got nowhere. I then did the LPC (unsponsored) at Nottingham Law School, where the careers guy ripped my CV and application form responses apart and basically told me they were completely useless. Sure enough, once I understood how to 'play the game', I started getting numerous interviews and assessment day invitations at firms much higher up the food chain. I hadn't changed, my grades, work experience and extra curriculars hadn't changed - it was all about two things: 1) how I presented myself; and 2) making sure I was telling the firms what they wanted to hear in response to the numerous mini-essay questions. Some people have stellar CVs and walk into a TC. Others (me included) didn't go to top unis and have to work a bit harder for it. That said, why didn't you get work experience instead of working in an admin role? You could have done paralegal work and been qualified by now...

Herman -25 Sep 2009 | 14:18

My applications were good. I had qualified lawyers, law teachers and career specialists at the law faculty career office look at them. As for paralegal work, I did apply, but everyone wanted me to have done the LPC, have a TC in place, and at least 6 months of prior experience.

I am now thinking about just taking out a loan for the BVC and seeing if I can get pupillage based on my advocacy and mooting skills.

Jason Smith -25 Sep 2009 | 22:25

Jason - do you have a desire to be unemployed or are you just taking the proverbial?

If you have failed to get a TC after making 100+ "good" applications, surely getting yourself into more debt by taking a course which will guarantee you to be up against stiffer competition for a pupillage is pretty much career suicide?

National Firm -26 Sep 2009 | 20:10

Jason, I also thought my applications were decent and couldn't understand the rejections. I'd been to the law faculty-organised functions for applying and spoken with the law specialist in the careers office multiple times. Then I did the LPC and spoke to their careers guy, and he literally changed my life (a little melodramatic, I admit, but true).

I can't be sure, but with better academics than half the trainees in the City, there must have been something wrong with your applications if you didn't get a single interview. I can't understand how you went from successfully applying to MC firms for vac schemes to not getting a single interview for TCs, but it cannot be 'bad luck'.

As for the BVC, I have to agree with the last poster. If you can't even get to interview with over 100 TC apps, you can forget the Bar. Even if you did somehow get an interview, they'd ask some pretty searching questions about a) why you didn't get a TC, b) why you haven't done anything useful (for a legal career) in the intervening 7 years, and c) why it's taken you this long to decide you want to be a barrister. Best of luck, but I think you'd be making a big mistake by doing the BVC.

Anonymous -28 Sep 2009 | 13:25

You have to wonder whether someone who hasn't managed to get themselves *anything* better than a Job Centre admin job in the seven years since they left uni is really cut out to be a lawyer...

1yr PQE -29 Sep 2009 | 16:25

In response to 1yr PQE - most lawyers are just about above admin workers anyway!

Anon -07 Oct 2009 | 11:30

When I was at the College of Law, there was a qualified doctor who had difficulty getting a training contract. She found out that her medical degrees were ignored because the firms outsourced the selection process and they only looked at A-level grades and hers weren't all As. Have you thought of other ways to approach the firms? Get yourself known by them - there are ways! Good luck.

Shan Veillard-Thomas -21 Oct 2009 | 18:22

Let's set it straight

I graduated from one of the lowest ranked Universities in the UK, achieved a mediocre grade of 2:2, went on to do an LLM at a Russell Group Uni which I passed. After I've graduated I thought I would never make it in the legal field but was proven the very opposite due to my determination. After months of working in non-legal environments and applying to several law firms I was invited for an interview and was taken on as a paralegal. Now I'm finishing my LPC in order to commence my training contract in a month. The point is, do not listen too much to what other people think about you. Instead, try to assess yourself and your abilities, work VERY VERY HARD and persuade everyone in your surrounding of that you're more than capable of doing the job.

And when I say it's possible, it is. I'm not even Brtish but in spite of my origin of birth, my personality and character overshadowed my academic record.

On a side note, I could also mention that I know people with 3rd degree classifications who are now working in the legal field, not necessarily as solicitors or barristers, but still..

Simon M -21 Jun 2010 | 14:24

lpc 7 years valid

The guy is still looking for a TC after seven years, despite a first. There must be many and even more with 2nds. However do people realise their CPE (GDL) and LPC become worthless after seven years? After this they need revalidating...ie you need to resit CPE and LPC subjects to apply for enrolement or a TC.

So he won't get a TC anyway! This is not well advertised and many get caught - I did.

f lome -11 Oct 2010 | 03:24

It's not what you know ....

...but who you know that counts. There are many different ways of succeeding to get into the legal profession: great academics, great experience, etc, but the two things that help more than any other are perseverance and using all the connections that you can. I worked as a paralegal for 2.5 years before securing a training contract 13 years ago. And from my first legal job to my current role it has generally been the contacts that I have built up that have made the difference between me getting the job and someone else.

Legal Manager -11 Oct 2010 | 15:45

Time for Plan B

The name of the uni does matter more to many of the top companies in the City (not only law firms). Unfortunately most are not honest and upfront about it so you won't necessarily hear about it in any feedback. There is also the little matter that almost all major law firms are seriously downsizing and are unlikely to recover even if/when the rest of the economy comes out of recession.

So if I were you I will implement my Plan B. Fast.

A Careers Adviser -16 Nov 2010 | 16:18