Pupillage.... getting fairer or wishful thinking?

Pupillages are notoriously difficult to get. There are even blogs dedicated to the quest!

As the Times explains, there are 500 vacancies a year for pupillage, contested by some 4,000 applicants. Looking at the cost of the BPTC (formerly known as the BVC), in addition to University tuition fees, a traditional argument has been that the system favours those with money (and connections) behind them.

However, the Bar Standards Board’s report into pupillage finds this to be a myth - the Bar is actually a meritocracy, with entrants from a wider range of socioeconomic backgrounds than other professions. Pupillage, say the BSB, is still the best form of training,

I remain to be persuaded. The rest of the Times article goes on to detail the low pay and long hours associated with pupillage, as well as “shocking” inconsistencies in the quality of training. The “diversity” figures, which look good on the face of it, and may well be, refer to ethnic and “cultural” backgrounds. Not sure what that means!

The Times notes that, whilst the bar may appear a meritocracy, it does not take into account the impact of the cost of study on those from poorer backgrounds, or indeed the inequalities of the education system.

In any event, a really good discussion piece for A level students, packed with useful details to add to their notes on barristers.

One significant improvement due in the autumn is the introduction of an aptitude test for the BPTC to prevent lost causes from wasting their money. Long overdue?

Also - have a read of the comments - it seems I am not the only one with doubts about the picture painted by the report!