Do we need more pupillages?
The number of students who want to become barristers shows little sign of diminishing with 3,100 applicants to the Bar Professional Training Course (BTPC) in 2010/2011 and 3,016 in 2011/2012. In 2010/2011 1,618 students successfully enrolled on the BTPC
The statistics show a continuing healthy level of demand for the BTPC despite course fees of between £10 - 15,000:
| BVC Year | 03/04 | 04/05 | 05/06 | 06/07 | 07/08 | 08/09 | 09/10 |
| Applicants | 2570 | 2883 | 2917 | 2870 | 2864 | 2540 | 2657 |
| Enrolments | 1449 | 1665 | 1745 | 1932 | 1837 | 1749 | 1793 |
| Successful | 1251 | 1392 | 1480 | 1560 | 1720 | 1330 | 1432 |
As a barrister I find this quite heartening. I enjoy my job and I think that it is fantastic that so many students continue to want to be barristers despite the often negative attitude towards us in the media - most of us are fairly skinny kitties and not the fat cats that we are portrayed as!
That said there is a growing level of concern at the bar and amongst students that the rising demand for the BPTC is not reflected by rising availability of pupillages, especially in areas where public funding cuts bite the hardest, such as crime and family law.
The statistics on pupillage generally make fairly stark reading:
Total number of barristers who commenced 1st six month pupillage between:
| Date of pupillage | Number |
| 1 October 2000 & 30 September 2001 | 695 |
| 1 October 2001 & 30 September 2002 | 812* |
| 1 October 2002 & 30 September 2003 | 586 |
| 1 October 2003 & 30 September 2004 | 518 |
| 1 October 2004 & 30 September 2005 | 556 |
| 1 October 2005 & 30 September 2006 | 515 |
| 1 October 2006 & 30 September 2007 | 527 |
| 1 October 2007 & 30 September 2008 | 562 |
| 1 October 2008 & 30 September 2009 | 464 |
| 1 October 2009 & 30 September 2010 | 460 |
| 1 October 2010 & 30 September 2011 | 446 |
* Due to 30 September 2002 falling on a Monday, 112 pupillages which would normally have been registered in the 2002/3 year were registered in the 2001/2 year, causing the higher than usual figure for that year and the lower than usual figure for 2002/3.
Total number of barristers who commenced 2nd six month pupillage between:
| Date of pupillage | Number |
| 1 October 2000 & 30 September 2001 | 700 |
| 1 October 2001& 30 September 2002 | 724 |
| 1 October 2002 & 30 September 2003 | 702 |
| 1 October 2003 & 30 September 2004 | 557 |
| 1 October 2004 & 30 September 2005 | 598 |
| 1 October 2005 & 30 September 2006 | 567 |
| 1 October 2006 & 30 September 2007 | 563 |
| 1 October 2007 & 30 September 2008 | 555 |
| 1 October 2008 & 30 September 2009 | 518 |
| 1 October 2009 & 30 September 2010 | 495 |
| 1 October 2010 & 30 September 2011 | 477 |
The steady downward trend in the number of pupillages available together with the increasing number of BTPC students means that competition to become a barrister is fierce. I presume that any student who signs up to the swingeing BTPC course fees really does want to become barrister rather than using the BPTC as a bizarrely expensive way of moving on to do something else. I entirely accept that there are a number of BPTC students from other jurisdictions who have no intention of becoming barristers in England & Wales: 30% of those called to the Bar in 2009 - 2010 were not from the UK (see PDF) and this is fairly consistent with my own experience both of doing the BPTC (then called the BVC!) and of talking to new students, but the fact remains that we have far more successful BPTC students than there are available pupillages.
This is a problem with many possible causes and I am not going to attempt to unpick the reason for the increasing demand and falling availability, but instead simply ask whether we really need more pupillages?
The answer to that question will, I suspect, vary enormously depending on who you choose to ask. I have been a member of the pupillage committee in my chambers for a number of years and much to my astonishment am nearly ’senior’ enough to become a pupil supervisor (eek!) and I know that from the perspective of chambers a pupil is not just about the money (pupils must be paid a minimum of £10,000 although most are paid more than this) but as much about the huge amount of time and effort that is put into training them by their pupil supervisors. In reality chambers must look on pupils as an investment and consider what they anticipate their need for junior barristers to be in the future. I cannot imagine that this is any different in the other organisations that offer pupillages, but from my own experience I can only speak for chambers.
What is clear from the statistics is that if you do get pupillage your prospects of tenancy are much better than they were:
Total number of barristers who obtained tenancy in the self-employed bar for the first time between:
| Date of Tenancy | Number |
| 1 October 1998 & 30 September 1999 | 541 |
| 1 October 1999 & 30 September 2000 | 511 |
| 1 October 2000 & 30 September 2001 | 535 |
| 1 October 2001 & 30 September 2002 | 541 |
| 1 October 2002 & 30 September 2003 | 698 |
| 1 October 2003 & 30 September 2004 | 601 |
| 1 October 2004 & 30 September 2005 | 544 |
| 1 October 2005 & 30 September 2006 | 531 |
| 1 October 2006 & 30 September 2007 | 499 |
| 1 October 2007 & 30 September 2008 | 494 |
| 1 October 2008 & 30 September 2009 | 497 |
| 1 October 2009 & 30 September 2010 | 467 |
Total number of barristers who entered the employed bar for the first time between:
| Date of Tenancy | Number |
| 1 October 2003 & 30 September 2004 | 182 |
| 1 October 2004 & 30 September 2005 | 156 |
| 1 October 2005 & 30 September 2006 | 191 |
| 1 October 2006 & 30 September 2007 | 228 |
| 1 October 2007 & 30 September 2008 | 239 |
| 1 October 2008 & 30 September 2009 | 213 |
| 1 October 2009 & 30 September 2010 | 171 |
Given the relatively close correlation between the number of tenancies and the number of pupillages it seems reasonable to presume that once you have completed pupillage you *will* become a barrister, so shouldn’t steps be taken to increase the number of pupillages available?
It seems as though the advantages of more pupillages being available are quite plain. It is likely to be easier to seek employment as a practicing barrister than it is to find a pupillage. The extremely high level of competition for pupillage may well be discouraging able applicants from poorer backgrounds who are less able to run the risk of paying for the BPTC (or getting burdened with yet further huge debt more likely) with such a low likelihood of pupillage at the end of it.
That said what is the purpose of a pupillage without a tenancy? If ten members of a chambers cannot each contribute £1,000 of their annual earnings towards paying a pupil then is it realistic to consider that the chambers will have enough work to take the pupil on as a tenant?
The Government position in relation to public funding is clearly a factor and there is a very clear view in Government that there is an over-supply of lawyers doing publicly funded work. Anecdotally there is a view that the chambers who are not offering pupillages are mainly those which are doing primarily publicly funded work.
I think this is a really difficult question, but I think we do a huge injustice to the thousands of BTPC students who miss out on pupillage if we don’t resolve it.
Zoe Saunders is a family barrister at St John’s Chambers
Readers' comments (8)
Miss.shah | 25-Oct-2011 4:55 am
We most Definately 'need' a greater number of pupillages. Being a recent BPTC graduate, the chances of pupillage seem very slim. If you are to compare the amount of money spent on the course, not to mention the time and dedication, it seems unjust that the chances of successfully attaining pupillage stand as they are. As the course has also changed not just by name, however through the syllabus and marking criteria, it is much more difficult to successfully complete the course. However it seems this change has not made it easier to attain pupillage.
There is no doubt that more pupillages are necessary, however the chances of more pupillages being available are are slim. If this is not a possible avenue, should there not be a restriction of the number of pupils who can undertake the BPTC, in order to reflect the number of pupillages available. It seems very unfair, to have to compete against so many applicants for a limited number of pupillages. Baring in mind that applicants would not only be those who recently completed the Bar, yet pupils who completed it maybe 3-4 years ago. There is simply too much competition. Furthermore for those students from poorer backgrounds, would suffer the affects of a lack of pupillages much more. After all they have invested so much money into it, and thus should have a high chance of gaining pupillage rather than a very minute chance.
There is no denying that something needs to be done.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Zoe Saunders | 25-Oct-2011 4:13 pm
Miss.shah - would you rather have more pupillages even if there were no more tenancies? Isn't the point to become a barrister not a pupil?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Sensible Lawyer | 25-Oct-2011 6:04 pm
Miss.shah - We "need" a greater number of pupillages? Is there vast quantities of legal work going undone? Do clients weep at the difficult task of finding an advocate? Are barristers forced to turn work away - "no time, I'm afraid, try somewhere else"?
I think not.
A vital legal skill is grasping the essential issue, and here the essential issue is this: the number of pupillages is determined by the demand for the services barristers provide, not by the number of people who want a pupillage. The Bar is a professional organisation not a charity or a club. No-one owes you a living, nor a pupillage.
Furthermore, it is not "unfair" that there is so much competition or "unjust" that your chances are as they are. Presumably you knew when starting the BVC or BPTC that the competition was fierce and that the most likely result was that you would not obtain pupillage? If so one wonders why you started. If not one wonders why you would spend so much money with so little idea of what you were spending it on.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26-Oct-2011 4:15 pm
The problem is huge numbers of students on the BPTC shouldn't have ever been allowed anywhere near it. Because they have absolutely no chance of getting pupillage. It's an absolute scandal that you can get a place on the course with a 2:2 from any old cruddy poly, but chambers can take their pick of the very best of the top university grads. After all, only 4% of pupils have 2:2s, almost all of whom will be mature applicants who have had a first career.
For almost everyone on the course, it's a complete waste of time, effort and - most importantly - money.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alex | 18-Apr-2012 12:54 pm
I completely agree- people need to be realistic about their future prospects with a 2:2.
There is an important distinction between optimistic and disillusioned.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 19-Apr-2012 4:47 pm
If there would be more pupillage, but not sufficient tenancies, you still could not find a tenency when you complete the pupillage stage. What is the points to increase number of pupillage?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jonny | 7-Jan-2013 3:07 pm
The problem is providers being allowed free reign on who they let onto the course. These are big businesses who are abusing their position as the keepers of the keys to the legal market; thousands of fresh-faced students are given the illusion that if they pay £15000 for a "respected" qualification (one that is virtually useless outside of the bar) they will have a fighting chance of getting a job. The very fact that the college of law has been bought out by private equity shows that this is a lucrative area.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 11-Mar-2013 6:09 pm
This issue can be easily resolved but before i get to that let me write a preamble:
Everyone in the law business would agree that there is a paramount need for acces to justice. Why then is there such huge disparity between the publicly funded side of the Bar and the private one. Answer: the private one is beyond the ambit of governmental powers (dispite the mamouth efforts of Lord Wolf to reform it), and the sad truth is that barristers, clerks, solicitors and partners in law firms want to keep it this way because the fees they charge are very handsom indeed.
My suggestion to solving the problem then would be as follows:
Have a level playing field in relation to funding both for barrister and solicitors alike when it comes to pupillages and training contracts and this should be the minimum requirement. this way more pupils and trainee solicitors can be taken on; as a result evryone benefits because:
a) the pupil/trainee solicitor would have completed the next stage and a such be entitled to a practicing certificate;
b) Chambers/Firms will be spoiled for choice and definitely choose from an array of quasi-qualified lawyers rather than finding half-way through the aprenticeship that the people they selected are not up to scratch;
c) the access to justice conundrum is aided by the fact that pupils without tenacy but with a practicing certificate will be doing a lot of pro-bono work to keep their certificates alive until they finally get employed or obtain tenancy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment