Does work experience work?

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand the point of doing 11(!) mini-pupillages. I can see work experience has a value in terms of getting an idea of what it's like to work in a particular industry, but the whole thing seems massively overrated to me.

Rich -12 Mar 2009 | 00:00

I think you'd be ill-advised to put 11 mini-pupillages on your OLPAS form or CV. I did 6 or 7, but mentioned only 3 in the OLPAS 'Work experience' section. If you're applying to 12 similar sets, which you should be, then research will tell you which of those mini-pupillages will most impress them or appear most relevant to them. Have the confidence that there's enough other things on your CV to rest at 3 mini pupillages. This doesn't stop you referring to the remainder in interview.

SR -12 Mar 2009 | 00:00

SR, I see your point. I'll probably do something like that.

Rich, it's a good idea to do minis in Chambers that you want to target in your pupillage applications, because it gives you that extra reason for applying, plus you get to see different areas of practice.

Ekaterina -12 Mar 2009 | 00:00

Informing a barrister at a Manchester set that you really want to be in London strikes me as a silly think to say, even if you're not applying to that set. Telling someone you're not interested in their firm/set/discipline/city is never likely to be well received.

HTG -13 Mar 2009 | 00:00

As a matter of interest, what made you choose the provinces in the end Ekaterina? I wouldn't have mentioned London to a provincial barrister - they are notoriously chippy about being perceived as second best. I'm also interested in your observation on not wanting to go to a chambers without e.g. Westlaw - I think you may need to remember that it's not that a chambers just 'has' these resources - they have to pay for them, and that includes everyone, including you if you're taken on. Westlaw and Lexis are both extremely expensive, and as such many chambers decide that they can make do without, especially if they have plenty of paper resources and e.g. a less expensive service like Lawtel for updating. I would be surprised if more than 50% of London chambers have Westlaw or Lexis. Not sure about the provinces, perhaps they are more necessary there as they are not near the resources of the Inn libraries.

Barrister -13 Mar 2009 | 00:00

I chose the provinces for a number of reasons, which include guaranteed tenancies, the range of work at the junior end, and other career development opportunities. Also, most chambers are located within a walking distance to the courts, so there's less travelling. London is just not for me, I guess.

Ekaterina -13 Mar 2009 | 00:00

Ekaterina, as someone with input into pupillage interviews/selections in chambers, I would suggest you work on those reasons for the provinces. Apologies if this comes across as patronising - I mean well! As I'm sure you are aware, there are very few chambers, even in the provinces, where tenancy is 'guaranteed', though it may well be that it is more likely. I don't know that the range of work encountered by junior barristers is superior in the provinces - care to elaborate? I think the bit of your response that really hit me between the eyes, however, is that about not wanting to travel - first, it is extremely unlikely that you will be required only to work in the one court that is within walking distance. In fact, arguably London chambers are better placed in this respect as there are tens of courts within easy reach of Temple, whereas in the provinces you are likely to be near one local court only. I don't know which area you wish to specialise in, but if it is common law/crime/family then as a baby junior (even in London) you are likely to be required to hop around the country to various courts, and as such an aversity to travelling further than walking distance would probably go down fairly badly at interview. Just my tuppence worth - good luck!

Barrister -16 Mar 2009 | 00:00

A typical response of a London barrister.

Anonymous -06 Apr 2009 | 01:00