Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="George Maxwell" data-source="post: 114161" data-attributes="member: 17165">Hey [USER=22304]@ChicoAnon[/USER],Thank you for posting this question as this really is an interesting one. I think that [USER=16764]@James Carrabino[/USER] has made some great points here. To add my own thoughts: I think that James' suggestion of reaching out to GR and being honest about the conundrum that you find yourself in is a very good one. That being said, none of the advice that we can give should be determinative because we just don't have all the facts (for example, whether the firm is giving you a hint here - or is genuinely giving you a free choice). If it were me my thought process would include considering:1. The benefits of both routesWith a vacation scheme, whatever happens, you would have something to show for it. You would also get paid, increase your network, arguably become better acquainted with life as a trainee (I know that you have already completed the GDL though so this is perhaps less relevant) and gain a better understanding of the sort of work you might be interested in (i.e., gain legal work experience). You would also have the opportunity to get to know the firm better (to see if it really is where you want to train). I will also add that if the firm employs an holistic approach to assessing vacation schemers (i.e., you are assessed across all the tasks you complete while at the firm, rather than the firm deciding entirely on the final 'exit' interview) then you are likely to have a more even shot on a vacation scheme than via the direct TC route (given the nature of direct TC interviews). With a direct training contract, you would avoid the stress of a vacation scheme- they really are stressful. Granted, you would have to face an interview and perhaps a written exercise etc. (which would also be stressful) but this would span a few hours rather than a week or longer. You would also be able to start work earlier. The converse of this is that you could go and do something entirely different (if the dates work out) and go and travel between finishing the SQE/LPC and working. 2. What my strengths are (i.e., which route suits me better)Personally, I would feel more comfortable completing a vacation scheme because anything can happen in an interview, whereas on a vacation scheme although there are more chances for things to go wrong, there are also more opportunities for things to go right!That being said, as James mentioned, this is definitely not the case for everyone. 3. The number of vacation schemers that generally receive offers following the vacation scheme There is conflicting advice on this, but some vacation schemes have very poor rates of conversion purely owing to the numbers of vacation schemers to TCs. This would likely factor for me (although again there is likely to be huge competition for TC places via the direct route too). This list is of course non-exhaustive (and I will keep thinking if there are things that I have missed here). I should emphasise as James did, this decision will likely not define your legal career. If you do not get a TC at this firm, the fact that you have been offered a vacation scheme goes to show that you are a capable candidate. I hear what you say about experiencing rejection in the past, but you are not the same candidate that you were when you started the process of applying. Sending 40+ applications will have improved your ability to write effective applications (at the very least).I hope that helps and please do let us know what you end up choosing  🚀 Always here if you would like any further thoughts!</blockquote>

Verification: Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?

Top Bottom

Search

Search

Reply to thread