Should I be applying for vac schemes or training contracts?

[techny13]

So I graduated from uni this summer in a non-law humanities degree and started working in a consulting firm last month. Very quickly realising that consulting isn’t for me and that I'd be more suited to law, but having already graduated/started work, I'm not sure whether I should be applying to vac schemes or TCs.

In terms of academics/experience, my cv is pretty good (graduated with a 1st, all A*s/As at A level/GCSE, strong extracurriculars). However, I have virtually no legal experience, so I'm assuming it might make more sense to apply to vac schemes(?). The only issue is that applications for winter vac schemes are mostly closed, so I’m limited to summer vac schemes, which would mean 6 more months of no legal experience and potentially having to wait another year to reapply if I don’t get any offers.

I’ve signed up to loads of virtual law careers fairs/recruiting events over the next few weeks to hopefully gain more careers insight, but with regards to actual applications, am I better off going straight for TCs, or are vac schemes the more realistic option? I'm mainly interested in MC and a few American firms, so conscious of no legal experience with the added competition.

Thanks!

 

[Jessica Booker]

I’d try and get more open days/insight days on your CV and then apply for training contracts

 

[Adam Gilchrist]

The only other thing to note is your interest in American firms. Quite a few of them either only recruit from vac schemes (Davis Polk, Shearman & Sterling, Sidey Austin etc) or recruit overwhelmingly from their vac schemes (Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis etc). Kirkland & Ellis in particular is notorious for doing this. For such firms, a vac scheme application might be a better idea.

 

[Jessica Booker]

The only other thing to note is your interest in American firms. Quite a few of them either only recruit from vac schemes (Davis Polk, Shearman & Sterling, Sidey Austin etc) or recruit overwhelmingly from their vac schemes (Skadden, Kirkland & Ellis etc). Kirkland & Ellis in particular is notorious for doing this. For such firms, a vac scheme application might be a better idea.

Smaller intakes will do that - I don’t think this is unique to US firms, it’s just they tend to have the smaller intakes.