I am often asked by aspiring lawyers whether they should apply for a winter or summer vacation scheme. However (spoiler alert), there's no objective answer to the question, so do take this with a pinch of salt, and consider all the circumstances around your application.

Are you eligible for both options?

You won't always have the choice between the two, so start by checking any eligibility requirements. The last thing you want to do is spend hours working on an application, only to be rejected because you're at the wrong stage in your education for the specific scheme. 

For example, some firms only offer winter vac schemes to final year students and graduates (or may prioritise law students over non-law students), which is usually because those candidates will likely be available to start their training contracts earlier than first / second / penultimate year students. 

Do timings matter to you? 

Specific winter vac schemes (and summer schemes for that matter) tend to feed into specific training contract intakes, so consider what timings work best for you. 

Hannah Salton - former Magic Circle recruiter and author of Graduate Careers Uncovered  - agrees, adding: “It's essential to base your decision on your current commitments and when the timing works best for you. Equally important is to be aware of the firm's specific requirements for when you’ll be available to start your training contract. For instance, some firms may decline an application if the candidate applying for a vacation scheme isn't available to start the training contract in the required year due to their studies.” 

If you do have a choice – and if you want to start your training contract as soon as possible - then I'd go for whichever scheme could result in an earlier offer (and these tend to be winter schemes).

Of course, this relies on the assumption that firms will give you an offer soon after the scheme (i.e. in late December/early January) rather than making you wait until the summer schemes have also concluded.

If - post university - you plan to study a Master's, go travelling, or do something else before kicking off your career (like I did!), then this is an important consideration. You may need to apply for a vac scheme that is linked to a later start date. 

Another thing to consider is that some firms only allow you to submit one application per year. This means that applying to an earlier scheme (e.g. applying for a winter scheme in July/August, as opposed to a summer scheme in November/December) could mean that if you are rejected, you’ll be able to reapply on an earlier date the next year. 

How much time can you spare? 

Winter schemes don't tend to involve such a big time commitments, as there’s limited space for them between universities breaking up in early December, and the Christmas holidays. In my experience, they tend to last a week, whereas summer schemes can last 2-4 weeks. 

This is worth thinking about if you're working and would need to take annual leave (or unpaid leave) to attend a scheme. One week’s annual or unpaid leave is less onerous than 2-4 weeks’ leave. 

However, if you're a student and have assignments to complete and exams to revise for in December, a summer scheme might be less disruptive from an academic standpoint. You don’t want to risk your grades to attend a vac scheme in December!

Do you want a deeper insight into life as a lawyer at a particular firm?

A longer summer scheme can also give you more of an insight into life as a lawyer - which could be good if you're not sure whether the career is for you. 

Of course, a longer scheme will also give you a deeper insight into life at the firm. However, this isn’t always a massive benefit: even if you don’t feel the firm is perfect for you, are you likely to reject an offer if you haven’t had the time to intern elsewhere? 

Saying that, if applying in the summer means you could theoretically do multiple schemes consecutively, this opportunity to compare firms before making a decision could be a real plus. 

Is one scheme easier to secure and convert than the other? 

I personally don’t think it’s easier to secure a job offer one way or the other. It wouldn’t make business sense for firms to accept lower quality candidates simply because they’re able to apply and attend an internship at a certain point in the year, especially given the significant amount of time and money it takes to train juniors.

Firms will want to hire the right people regardless. 

If I were running a firm, I would simply stop running a scheme if the quality of applicants was consistently lower, rather than settle for a lower standard.

Moreover, once you're on a scheme, some firms might have enough jobs for all interns, as long as they're good enough. 

There are simply too many variables, and there’s too much at stake, to proceed on the assumption that applying for a specific scheme offers a greater chance of success.

So to summarise, there's no objectively better option - it very much depends on you and your circumstances!