Advice for applying to direct training contracts or vacation schemes?

[Lat94]

Hello! I hope everyone is well!

I was just seeking some advice about whether it is better to apply for direct training contracts or vacation schemes. I have graduated and have done two vacation schemes and am unsure of which to apply too?

Also, does anyone have a list of firms that do not accept graduates for their vacation schemes (e.g. Slaughter & may, Clifford Chance, Freshfields)?

Finally, I've heard a few firms don't actually recruit heavily from their vacation scheme and thus it is better to apply for their training contract. Does anyone know which firms do this?

Thank you in advance!

 

[AJ]

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer/approach here. It depends on what you feel comfortable with, and whether you want to do more vac schemes. You say you've done a couple (ps well done), so that should/will help a lot with applications/work experience sections, some of the questions and type of law firm you want to work at. Personally I don't see value in doing more unless it's the only option to get a TC at a firm

Things to however consider:

- Some firms recruit trainees directly from vac schemes. There's no other way in as they don't have a direct training contract option. So this pretty much makes the decision for you - have to apply for a vac scheme
- Like you've mentioned some firms don't actually recruit heavily from their vac scheme. They're open to directly training contract applications. Most will say this on their websites. Not sure what truth there is in this, but I heard that the larger the number of trainee places a firm has, the less likely it is that they will fill all of these from their vac scheme
- I've noticed a few firms give a very strong hint on their website whether its best to apply for a vac scheme or direct training contract. Particularly, the US firms. This has tended to imply applying for a vac scheme is best.
- A vac scheme gives you a couple of weeks to impress and be remembered, after you've been assessed and got in. For direct training contracts, you're solely relying on assessment.
- Be mindful that some firms only allow one application either for vac scheme or training contract. Pick carefully.
- For some firms, you can apply for a vac scheme and training contract together in the same application. I think that was the case with bclp this year.
- Vac scheme deadlines are early than Training Contracts, for some firms. Why not apply for a few vac schemes and see how you go. Then from January when a lot of vac schemes close, you've got around 6 months to focus on direct training contract applications.

I'd suggest analysing the websites for firms you really want to apply to. See what they say about which route to take. e.g HSF, CMS, DLA clearly state they are only going to take on trainees from vac schemes. Try and meet them if possible or reach out to them and ask on a preferred route. Perhaps with another interesting question, so that it's not just about which route to take.

It's not so black and white, but hope the above helps to give you something to think about when deciding.

 

[kaveesha]

When I went to the NRF Legal Cheek event, one of the trainees said that it was easier to get in through a TC than a VS for NRF specifically as they don't heavily focus on recruiting through the VS like other firms do.

 

[Lat94]

I don't think there is a right or wrong answer/approach here. It depends on what you feel comfortable with, and whether you want to do more vac schemes. You say you've done a couple (ps well done), so that should/will help a lot with applications/work experience sections, some of the questions and type of law firm you want to work at. Personally I don't see value in doing more unless it's the only option to get a TC at a firm

Things to however consider:

- Some firms recruit trainees directly from vac schemes. There's no other way in as they don't have a direct training contract option. So this pretty much makes the decision for you - have to apply for a vac scheme
- Like you've mentioned some firms don't actually recruit heavily from their vac scheme. They're open to directly training contract applications. Most will say this on their websites. Not sure what truth there is in this, but I heard that the larger the number of trainee places a firm has, the less likely it is that they will fill all of these from their vac scheme
- I've noticed a few firms give a very strong hint on their website whether its best to apply for a vac scheme or direct training contract. Particularly, the US firms. This has tended to imply applying for a vac scheme is best.
- A vac scheme gives you a couple of weeks to impress and be remembered, after you've been assessed and got in. For direct training contracts, you're solely relying on assessment.
- Be mindful that some firms only allow one application either for vac scheme or training contract. Pick carefully.
- For some firms, you can apply for a vac scheme and training contract together in the same application. I think that was the case with bclp this year.
- Vac scheme deadlines are early than Training Contracts, for some firms. Why not apply for a few vac schemes and see how you go. Then from January when a lot of vac schemes close, you've got around 6 months to focus on direct training contract applications.

I'd suggest analysing the websites for firms you really want to apply to. See what they say about which route to take. e.g HSF, CMS, DLA clearly state they are only going to take on trainees from vac schemes. Try and meet them if possible or reach out to them and ask on a preferred route. Perhaps with another interesting question, so that it's not just about which route to take.

It's not so black and white, but hope the above helps to give you something to think about when deciding.

Thank you so much @AJ for this incredibly useful information!

I think I will go for your approach and apply to mostly vac schemes up until january and then do direct training contract applications. I think most firms generally use the vacation scheme now so I think that is the better option but still will see how it goes.

Thank you again for the help, I really appreciate it!

 

[Lat94]

When I went to the NRF Legal Cheek event, one of the trainees said that it was easier to get in through a TC than a VS for NRF specifically as they don't heavily focus on recruiting through the VS like other firms do.

Thank you! I am hoping to apply to NRF this year so thats very helpful to know!

 

[AJ]

I’m rethinking/having second thoughts over my comments on this earlier.

What are others doing??

If you apply for a VS, can you later transfer to the TC app process??

 

[Salma]

I’m rethinking/having second thoughts over my comments on this earlier.

What are others doing??

If you apply for a VS, can you later transfer to the TC app process??

I think it really depends on the firm you’re applying too and how understanding they are, I think it is better to go to an open day and ask the recruiters this question directly.