The Code of Good Recruitment Practice: what you need to know

On 1 April 2015 the SRA (Solicitors Regulation Authority) confirmed its withdrawal from the Code of Good Recruitment Practice. This voluntary code was drawn up by the SRA, AGR (Association of Graduate Recruiters) and AGCAS (The Association of Graduate Careers Advisory Services), and was designed to regulate the recruitment process for training contracts, while protecting both students’ and recruiters’ interests.

The SRA’s withdrawal led to some scaremongering by the legal media. Headlines speculated that it would lead to law firms offering training contracts to people who hadn’t even left school. From a practicality point of view, this would never happen. It’s painful enough recruiting two to three years in advance, so no firm wants to make that five to seven years. But I can understand that there are more reasonable concerns held by both students and recruiters, so wanted to give you an update on what’s happened since the announcement.

Firstly, the code still exists! The majority of those involved with the code are working to ensure that it remains in place. The AGR and AGCAS, along with the JLD (Junior Lawyers Division), are currently working with law firms to review the code. A working group is due to be formed to review it in time for the next recruitment cycle that starts in October.

For this recruitment cycle, the current code will remain. A recent survey by the AGR states that 92% of firms questioned agree with the code and will be sticking to it for this cycle. So nothing really should change! The majority of firms will continue to adhere to the "rules", but as in previous years (the code has always been voluntary), you may find a small number of firms which do not.

What does the code currently say?

It depends on whether you are a penultimate-year undergraduate or not. Put simply, the rules are as follow:

• All candidates should receive a minimum of 28 days to consider their offer from the date on the written offer letter - it cannot be withdrawn before this time;
• For penultimate-year undergraduates only, the 28-day rule still applies, but (i) training contract applications should not close before 31 July of their penultimate year, and (ii) a training contract offer should not be made to them before 1 September as they go into their final year.

Candidates are also bound by obligations. They are:

• You should make a decision in a timely manner. If you cannot make a decision, you should ask for an extension.
• You should not hold more than two offers – if you do, you should decline those that aren’t your top two choices.
• Once you have accepted a training contract, you should withdraw from other recruitment processes and not make any further applications.

A copy of the full code can be found here.

What should I do if a firm does not abide by the code?

I have heard of penultimate-year undergrads who have recently received training contract offers, some four months earlier than they should have done. Not only do they have to make a decision on their future career while they are in the middle of exams, but their offers will expire at a time that most firms are only opening their applications. Added to this, they have to decide before they have the chance to complete summer vacation schemes with other firms. I am appalled by this tactic and think it is a very underhand approach by firms. But what should you do if you are put in this awkward situation?

My advice is to try and negotiate with the firm, remind them of the code and ask (politely) for the reasons as to why they are not abiding by it. They could have legitimate reasons for doing so, so find out what these are and then reassess. Whether it is asking to complete an application sometime between their early application deadline and the 31 July, or for an extension to consider your offer, there is absolutely no harm in asking and the firm can only say no.

For any penultimate-year undergraduates receiving offers before 1 September, most would think it is reasonable for you to ask for an extension until either 1 or 28 September. This is when the majority of other firms will either be offering you training contracts or will want a decision. 

If the firm is not providing any flexibility, then you have a difficult decision to make. But if they are not being flexible on this, can you imagine what else they might not accommodate during your time with the firm?

My opinion is that if a firm is choosing not to abide by the code and making offers too early and/or not offering you a reasonable offer period of time in which to make your decision, then they cannot expect you to meet your obligations as a candidate either. In my eyes, given the unnecessary pressures put on you, it is justifiable for you to accept their offer, continue to explore other opportunities and then retract your acceptance if you decide to accept a training contract elsewhere. However, for the firms that do abide by the code or that are accommodating with timeframes, you should treat them with the same respect they have shown you and the code by adhering to your responsibilities.

Jessica Booker has worked in graduate recruitment for the last 10 years. She worked for four law firms before setting up her own consultancy business, Star Potential, in 2014. If you have experienced any issues with firms that ignore the code and want to discuss them, please contact Jess via [email protected].