Much ado about nothing

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has announced its decision to withdraw from the voluntary code governing good practice in the recruitment of trainee solicitors from the end of
this month. The response
from the legal sector has mostly been unfavourable. Two of the four signatories to the code, the Junior Lawyers Division (JLD) and the Association of Graduate Careers Advisory Services (AGCAS), issued a joint statement expressing their disappointment at the SRA’s withdrawal. The remaining signatory, the Associate of Graduate Recruiters (AGR),
has said that the code will
now cease to have substance.

In light of the SRA’s decision to scrap the minimum trainee wage from 2014, a move that was widely condemned, it is unsurprising that this recent announcement has been criticised. Many will view this
as the SRA taking a further
step away from protecting
the welfare of those entering
the legal profession.

In my view, there are benefits to scrapping the code which have been overlooked in
the haste to use this recent announcement as a spring board for mounting an attack on the SRA.

Staggered deadlines

The code states that the
final date for graduate job applications will not be before
31 July in a student’s penultimate year of study. The effect of
the SRA’s withdrawal from the
code may mean a staggering
of training contract deadlines throughout the year, as firms close applications at earlier dates in order to secure the best talent above rival firms.

For those searching for a training contract, this may be a blessing in disguise. An earlier deadline will provide firms with more time to carefully consider each application, as opposed to the current pressure placed on employers by the one-month turnaround during August to review applications, interview candidates, and make offers. Those who don’t tick all of the training contract application boxes, perhaps due to an isolated poor grade, may find their applications stand a better chance of success in such circumstances.

Further, the staggering of deadlines enables students to spread out the work of drafting applications throughout the year and drives them out of the poor habit of pushing through a flurry of applications at the last minute. To preserve deadlines for the purpose of allowing students free time to draft applications after the exam period is artificial and not a reflection of the real world, which students ought
to be prepared for.

The SRA’s withdrawal from
the code, which also stipulates
a timescale for the making of training contract offers, will encourage competition between firms, which will be able to work with greater flexibility to snag top talent. For those sending
out applications this year,
such competition is welcome – particularly if they look back on the recession, when firms were dropping students who were
due to start training contracts, not fighting over them.

The SRA have made
decisions with far more serious consequences in the past, and, as a legal community, let us
save our judgement for such instances and not occasions like this one, when some of us have simply made much ado about nothing. SJ

Natasza Slater is a trainee at Howard Kennedy