For those, who haven't heard of Accutrainee until now, I will briefly explain the model and how it is different to the “Traditional” model... Accutrainee seconds out trainees to firms on SRA approved Training Contracts as and when they are needed on essentially temporary contracts. Under the “Traditional model”, a Training Contract is undertaken over a two year period and a Trainee will generally complete this by working with one single firm throughout that time. The Accutrainee concept is different as a trainee is more likely to complete training with a number of different firms over a two year period; also, the recruitment period is more flexible (many firms currently managing training programmes, where applications are two years in advance of the trainee starting.)
I put the question of whether we all should become Accutrainees to my fellow LPC owls and was somewhat surprised by the response of "Where do I sign?" I am a rather open minded bunny, but love more than anything to play the devil's advocate and inquired further as to their motivations to become the next Accutrainee candidates. My line of questioning read something like the FAQs of your Accutrainee sceptic: Aren't you concerned about the quality of training? Do you think a firm will have a genuine interest in investing in your future, when you're only on a temporary contract? Wouldn't it just be better to apply to become a paralegal in view of securing a Training Contract? I'm not sure if I am missing the trainee boat on this one, but I seemed to be far more concerned than the legal owls I had spoken to, who were still asking me how they could jump on board. For those of you, who cannot resist, here is the information you need to become a fully fledged Accutrainee candidate: http://www.accutrainee.com/trainee-solicitor-training-contract/solicitorapplications.
Personally, my concerns on the quality of training links in with my concerns on firms investing in future lawyers. I don't only want to qualify as a solicitor, I want to qualify as a good solicitor, who engages with the ethos of the firm and some day hopefully progresses to become a partner, or even have my own law firm. I will not dwell on my stint in the Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal, but I know only too well the consequences of "poor" training; seeing first hand many junior solicitors putting misconduct down to inappropriate training. I'm not saying that the Accutrainee model will provide substandard training, but when some firms, who take "full term" trainees do not adequately train, it may be less likely that a firm, who takes a trainee on a temporary basis will be as interested in training to as high a standard. The vested interest on quality training on the firm's part not only relates to belief of the integrity of the profession, but the investment on that person's future. We have to remember that a law firm is a business, who wants to surround itself with the best and brightest in order to achieve goals in future success.
Under the Accutrainee model, we have to remember that the trainee is needed "as and when" dictated by business needs. I can see this working positively, such as when a firm, with a tight budget is unsure of whether to invest that Law Society minimum salary on a graduate, who may be better than perfect on paper, walk the walk, talk the talk, but when he arrives on the first day, is a complete liability. Accutrinee enables a firm to "cushion" its risks by vetted trainees, who have gone through further training and have to "prove" themselves. Many trainees may in fact find that jumping those extra hoops may pay off and be offered a more permanent position. A firm then would have made a more secure investment on a trainees' future as well as the trainee progressing one step further, rather than waiting in the wings as a paralegal for a number of years before being "snapped up". On the other hand; how open is this model to abuse from firms wanting to take advantage of eager beaver trainees for a limited time to do the jobs that nobody wants to do during the "busy periods"? Also, securing unpaid work experience in law firms is increasingly challenging even for graduates; with a wide-spread Accutrainee model, surely firms will no longer require students for work experience. We all know that slogan being blasted in law schools' career services up and down the country: Experience, experience, experience.
It is a well known saying that life is not about the destination, but the journey itself. This can be said for life as it can career; a middle-aged partner with a sharp suit and gnashers a-glaze on the "about us" part of a law firm's web site says nothing about the back story; that investment someone made a couple of decades ago, when he was offered then the position of "Articled Clark". Like all new ideas, it cannot always be predicted whether they are good ideas. We cannot currently look on a law firm's website and see a partner in an equally sharp suit with a caption below saying; “this person started as an Accutrainee”. Will we in the future see this image? Only time will tell. Will I become an Accutrainee? Perhaps not just yet.
There's got to be something not quite right about an Accutrainee trainee earning less than half than their counterparts at the same firms (who are employed directly by the firm). You could say that Accutrainee exploits desperate wannabe lawyers and you would be correct.
ReplyDelete