The Snobbery Factor in Mini-P Selection

Once more, it's time for Evil_Genius' Thread of the Week.

Having recently been perusing top chambers' tenant profiles, I noticed that (where specified), the mini-pupillages listed tend to be those within the top tier * (i.e. top 20 sets, often with a commercial emphasis). As I have a realistic assessment of my potential, I have little intention of spending more than 1-2 OLPAS slots in applying to this league of sets and haven't an inkling of interest in predominantly commercial sets. Indeed, I would much rather apply for minis within the league just below, where my sycophantic efforts could actually bear fruit come application time. However, would I be better off, in the esteemed opinion of TSR, getting a balance of minis within these two categories? I suspect the answer largely depends on whether pupillage committees in the second-tier Chambers and the Bar Scholarship panels give any serious weight to the prestige of the mini-p sets.

As an ancillary question, are assessed minis more impressive on a CV within the scholarship/pupillage context than vanilla placements? I have seen at least a few pupillage applications asking for the assessed/non-assessed classification when stating minis, which would suggest it may be significant. I do not necessarily intend to apply to the assessed sets for pupillage, as they tend to be within the top-20/commercial league.

Any light shed on this would be rewarded with the creative use of smileys in measured bursts of grateful joy.

* When using the terminology of 'leagues' and 'tiers', I'm referring mostly to the difficulty of gaining pupillage there rather than the quality of their advocates. There, that should be enough of a disclaimer for Simon, as I know he is quite particular on this point :smile:

Reply 1

Simon Myerson QC

5

Providing the sets are remotely respectable the only thing that matters is that the geographical location should roughly match.

Good phrasing.

Reply 2

Legal_Jim

I gather that the assessed mini-p schemes are used to determine whether they may find you suitable for a full pupillage (that's what it says on certain Chambers' sites anyway). Personally, I've tended to avoid these schemes as for me it has been more important to discover what areas of law interest me the most.

Reply 3

Lord Fisher

Evil_Genius

Once more, it's time for Evil_Genius' Thread of the Week.

Having recently been perusing top chambers' tenant profiles, I noticed that (where specified), the mini-pupillages listed tend to be those within the top tier * (i.e. top 20 sets, often with a commercial emphasis). As I have a realistic assessment of my potential, I have little intention of spending more than 1-2 OLPAS slots in applying to this league of sets and haven't an inkling of interest in predominantly commercial sets. Indeed, I would much rather apply for minis within the league just below, where my sycophantic efforts could actually bear fruit come application time. However, would I be better off, in the esteemed opinion of TSR, getting a balance of minis within these two categories? I suspect the answer largely depends on whether pupillage committees in the second-tier Chambers and the Bar Scholarship panels give any serious weight to the prestige of the mini-p sets.

As an ancillary question, are assessed minis more impressive on a CV within the scholarship/pupillage context than vanilla placements? I have seen at least a few pupillage applications asking for the assessed/non-assessed classification when stating minis, which would suggest it may be significant. I do not necessarily intend to apply to the assessed sets for pupillage, as they tend to be within the top-20/commercial league.

Any light shed on this would be rewarded with the creative use of smileys in measured bursts of grateful joy.

* When using the terminology of 'leagues' and 'tiers', I'm referring mostly to the difficulty of gaining pupillage there rather than the quality of their advocates. There, that should be enough of a disclaimer for Simon, as I know he is quite particular on this point :smile:

Omg, almost snap! My eyes are nearly bleeding I've been on the net trying to decide where to apply to and how they fit with where I apply to pupillage for, for almost a month solid now. Personally I've always been put off assessed minis because I'm worried I will mess something up and negate my chance of being called for interview, wheras I may have got called if all they got was my OLPAS/application form. Knowing Mr Myerson's chambers operate assessed minis, I would be grateful if he could elaborate on what chambers look to gain from the assessment, and indeed what form it takes.

I was considering taking the opposite approach to you, and going for mainly prestigous sets on the minis, and deciding which of those to use an OLPAS application on, especially as many of them are Oxbridge-heavy (me being not) but then still having a roll call of having done mini-ps at these 'top' sets for my CV. Also, I thought it would be simpler to get called for interview at a 'middling' set without a mini P than maybe a 'top' set.

Also, as I may spend another year in education after this coming year (having already graduated) I was wondering whether to use this years OLPAS slots as interview experience and filling them with more 'standard' sets...though I would then be torn if I got an offer and whether to do the extra years study and reapply for a higher proportion of prestigous sets the year after, but potentially having discarded the only offer of my life?!

Oh, and a basic question here. Does it help your chances of getting interview/pupillage if you've done a mini at that set? I'm just really worried I make a bad impression/don't ask enough questions/am too much like a baby lamb and so will actually harm my chances with a set, even though the mini is not formally assessed (they all make a note on you don't they).

Help! My brain is about to explode on this computer screen (along with my eyes)!

Reply 4

Evil_Genius

OP

I believe assessed minis have greater weight on forms by virtue of being more exclusive--a pupillage-limbo, so to speak. Simon seems to disagree, but then perhaps this is a reflection on his set's commonsensical liberality more than the status quo at London sets. I'm currently applying for all assessed minis I can find that are not entirely incongruent with likely OLPAS choices--I'm finding it difficult to find them, though, other than at the MC/Silver sets (any suggestions?).

I think it's imperative for anyone who is (as they well should be) applying for both London and provinces sets to have at least 1 mini within each circuit (I've done two in NE, will be doing one in the South shortly), to show that their pupillage applications are not motivated by desperation but rather by a consistent pattern of interest. A vac placement in the provinces is absolute gold, too (even if it involved me crying bloody tears of boredom for a week), as is a London placement (ahh, Olswang's fine assortment of jelly beans). It's also key to get minis at specialist sets if you'll be applying there (i.e. my ideal set is a media one--unfortunately, as there are only 4 of them, this means I need to do a mini at each lest the remaining sets become upset with my choices). Also, without having seen the OLPAS form, I'm thinking of putting the number of mini pupils recruited annually by the set (where advantageous), so as to get across the fact that they aren't just handed out like candy.

I entirely symphatise with your 'what if i get an offer' quandary--I'm starting BVC next September, having already graduated....my advice there would be to look at just how many offers/interviews you receive--if it's just one, then it's likely a lucky fluke--grab onto it as if you life depended on it. If not, then you can obviously repeat the performance the year after... My concern there, however, is that using the 'hail of grapeshot' method in applications (i.e. applying to all sets you could possibly live with practising in) prior to the BVC may 'black list' you, to an extent, during the subsequent season. Simon's recent entry suggests this is the case--however, a few other barristers suggest it isn't. Personally, I don't see the rationale in penalising persistence and self-improvement...

Regarding mini--> pupillage, it absolutely helps (even if just to show you were interested in that set not out of desperation alone...). I tend to get along very well indeed with my shadow-masters--record your impressions, court visits, discussions for future use at interview. Also, if at all possible, let the clerk know you admire the work of *X Senior Barrister at that Set who is well known for Y* and would love the chance to see him in action, naturally if this is not inconvenient. You'll not only get the points for proactivity, but also get exposure to more interesting work and can chat up someone who is far more likely to be on the pupillage committee than a junior barrister--also, their opinion would carry more weight.

The Snobbery Factor in Mini-P Selection

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you