Government Legal Service Paying For BVC

FizzPopSpan

- I'd like to be a human rights barrister.

They are a bit of a glut on the market.
Too many law students want to do human rights.

Reply 5

Lewisy-boy

11

Human rights, employment and IP all seem to be hugely oversubscribed at present, they are the 'in fashion' areas. That post the relevance of which was disputed is clearly just a gloating post :wink:

.

HOwever, I think it's good that the government is paying for the BVC as that way they might attract more high quality applicants who otherwise couldn't afford the BVC (obviously those fortunate enough to get scholarships can be excluded).

Reply 6

Lewisy-boy

HOwever, I think it's good that the government is paying for the BVC as that way they might attract more high quality applicants who otherwise couldn't afford the BVC (obviously those fortunate enough to get scholarships can be excluded).

I cant imagine that too many high quality applicants would actually stay with the government. Once they have used the government, as a stepping stone and as a platform to hone their real-world skills, they will move on.

For example, consider Drogue an EM graduate from Oxford. He is in the Fast Stream program of the Civil Service and will thrive within it. However, I would be very surprised if he is still in the Civil Service in 10 years time. He will probably be with McKinsey or in upper-middle management of a corporation in a decade.

Reply 7

flugestuge

I cant imagine that too many high quality applicants would actually stay with the government. Once they have used the government, as a stepping stone and as a platform to hone their real-world skills, they will move on.

Actually, the government legal service offers quite unique legal training which appeals to a number of high class graduates purely because it allows them to work in an area which better reflects their legal interests. Although I am sure a number of people will move on (as they will from any job), the GLS should not be sniffed at because it is (for some reason) seen as less prestigious, or because the comp is not as good. The people I have spoken to who chose this route were dedicated to it from the start and had a real desire to do the work. They have no plans to leave.

Reply 8

Ishtar

the GLS should not be sniffed at because it is (for some reason) seen as less prestigious, or because the comp is not as good.

Well as you just pointed out, it IS seen as less prestigious and less well paid.
The best law graduates from Oxbridge will prefer Magic Circle jobs and jobs with Brickcourt or Essex chambers. Of course, there will always be some committed treehuggers who stay on at the GLS.

However, even tree huggers realise, that if they want to save the world, legally crucifying refugees and citizens on behalf of the government if not the best way to do it.

Reply 9

flugestuge

Well as you just pointed out, it IS seen as less prestigious and less well paid.

The fact that I pointed that out does not negate any aspect of my argument.

flugestuge

The best law graduates will prefer Magic Circle jobs or jobs with Brickcourt and Essex chambers. Of course, there will always be some committed treehuggers who stay on at the GLS.

This is a massive generalisation. There are some incredibly good lawyers at the GLS. Just because most of the top law grads choose the path most trodden does not mean that there will not be a few who decide on the GLS because they are genuinely intersted. And these people are not, in my experience, 'treehuggers'.

flugestuge

However, even tree huggers realise, that if they want to save the world, legally crucifying refugees and citizens on behalf of the government if not the best way to do it.

Well, one of the nice things about the GLS is that once you are advanced anough you have the chance to influence legal policy on some level. You are also advising the government on the legality of its actions. I should imagine that just as much legal crucifixion goes on in the halls of the MC firms and top chambers. The treehuggers you describe are going to be very disappointed when they exit the GLS only to discover that they are helping BAT, ExxonMobil et al in their quest for world domination.

Reply 10

Ishtar

This is a massive generalisation. There are some incredibly good lawyers at the GLS.

There are some very bright people in every sphere of life.
However, some areas tend to attract the capable more strongly than others.

There are some incredibly bright students at Westminster University, Greenwich University and Thames Valley university. It is however a fact that the best students generally prefer Oxford and Cambridge to Thames Valley University. On the average, neurosurgeons tend to be more capable and more intelligent than binmen. Similarly, on the average, Magic Circle aspirants tend to be of higher quality/better than GLS aspirants.

Reply 11

Ishtar

The treehuggers you describe are going to be very disappointed when they exit the GLS only to discover that they are helping BAT, ExxonMobil et al in their quest for world domination.

At least, if you are advising IBM or Goldman Sachs on their legal issues, you go into it with no illusions about saving the world.
In the GLS, you end up f'ing the small people and the impoverished while rationalising that you are doing it for the Government.

Reply 12

flugestuge

There are some very bright people in every sphere of life.
However, some areas tend to attract the capable more strongly than others.

There are some incredibly bright students at Westminster University, Greenwich University and Thames Valley university. It is however a fact that the best students generally prefer Oxford and Cambridge to Thames Valley University. On the average, neurosurgeons tend to be more capable and more intelligent than binmen. Similarly, on the average, Magic Circle aspirants tend to be of higher quality/better than GLS aspirants.

Yes they do tend to be of a higher quality, but I don't think the demarcation is as defined as you seem to suggest by dismissing the people who decide to stay as 'treehuggers', as if their imagined liberal tendancies could be the only thing keeping them in the job. I very nearly decided to go to the GLS myself for the very reason that you actually get to practice law proper and it is, in general, more intellectually stimulating for the academic lawyer. However in the end I decided to go to the MC because of the lifestyle (by this I do not mean pay, which is not really a patch on IBs for example - rather I mean working on large transactions and being part of a very business minded firm).

I would be interested to know how many people you have spoken to who actually work for the GLS. I seem to have come away with a very different impression to yours. And I do also feel that perhaps the reason why fewer top grads choose to go there is the fact that it is not really pushed as an option as much as the big commercial firms/chambers.

Reply 13

flugestuge

At least, if you are advising IBM or Goldman Sachs on their legal issues, you go into it with no illusions about saving the world.
In the GLS, you end up f'ing the small people and the impoverished while rationalising that you are doing it for the Government.

Interestingly, I do suffer from these illusions. It is quite obvious at the moment that the practices of the big financial institutions have the potential to seriously impact the lives of every single person in this country. Advising them is about as close as I can get to saving the world as a vilified lawyer :smile:

And come on! You seem to have a ridiculous view of what the majority of GLS lawyers actually do. They are working on transport, healthcare, tax etc etc. They are not all chasing after 90 year old immigrants who are being deported to certain torture and death.

Reply 14

Ishtar

It is quite obvious at the moment that the practices of the big financial institutions have the potential to seriously impact the lives of every single person in this country. Advising them is about as close as I can get to saving the world as a vilified lawyer :smile:

That is a most thought provoking concept.
Thank you for that perspective.
I find that quite interesting.

Reply 15

Chocca

10

I hate human rights lawyer wannabes...

Mostly because the majority aren't aware that outside of Blackstone Chambers and a few other "top" sets, it's really low paid, low brow work. I hate the fakeness that surrounds it too.

"Oooh I wanna be a human rights lawyer so I can discuss all of the bad things going on in the world and act as though I care about all of the oppressed people, then write about it in the Guardian...I might join Amnesty International too, it'll make me look like I care about stuff"

*Vomits*

Reply 16

Chocca

"Oooh I wanna be a human rights lawyer so I can discuss all of the bad things going on in the world and act as though I care about all of the oppressed people, then write about it in the Guardian...I might join Amnesty International too, it'll make me look like I care about stuff"

*Vomits*

Yeah, most of the would be human rights lawyers I have met have been like that. They want to feel good but secretly hope to get a high paying job with Blackstone !

Reply 17

Stealth-Mode

13

flugestuge

Yeah, most of the would be human rights lawyers I have met have been like that. They want to feel good but secretly hope to get a high paying job with Blackstone !

Well if a person can achieve both, why not? If you could get paid very well for doing something you really love and have a passion for, I'm sure you would jump at the chance.

And people who say that commercial/chancery law is their deep passion that truly brings happiness to their lives are 99% of the time full of ...it. If those fields paid the same as criminal/most human rights branches of the law, i'm certain that almost nobody would bother to aspire to it. Those are the type of hypocrites that make regurgitate, why can't they just admit to being attracted to the money and prestige, I mean its hardly a crime.

Reply 18