TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[confusedbird]

Following my previous post (thank you to those who replied btw), is there anyone in the same boat as me that's still waiting for an update? I swear Latham is just edging us at this point 💀

can Latham please just put us out of our misery and tell us what they want? its been so longg!!!

 

[sack]

Orrick rejection- Left with Sidley, MOFO, Gibson, W&C (post VI)- I would assume all four of them ghosted. And just submitted SH & PH recently. This cycle is really hard.🥶🥶

 

[sapphireoreos]

Has anyone who got a holding email from CRS heard back post-app? (This is for the VS btw)

 

[desperateTCseeker1998]

Holding myself accountable again (Orrick rejection)

CC* ✅📝❌
HSF ✅📝❌
NRF ✅📝❌
Weil ✅❌
Akin ✅❌
Sidley ✅❌
Orrick ✅❌
Willkie ✅🎥❌
Cooley ✅❌
Latham ✅❌
Milbank ✅❌
Kirkland ✅❌
Dechert ✅❌
Skadden ✅❌
Goodwin ✅❌
Covington ✅❌
Linklaters* ✅📝❌
Paul, Weiss ✅❌
Slaughters* ✅❌
Freshfields* ✅📝❌
Fried Frank* ✅
Gibson Dunn ✅
Macfarlanes* ✅📝
White & Case ✅❌
Morgan Lewis ✅📞❌
Paul Hastings* ✅
White & Case* ✅
Morgan Lewis* ✅
Hogan Lovells* ✅📝
Cleary Gottlieb ✅❌
A&O Shearman ✅📝❌
Vinson & Elkins ✅❌
Arnold & Porter ✅
Baker McKenzie ✅📝❌
King & Spalding* ✅
Winston & Strawn ✅
Morrison Foerster ✅
Sullivan & Cromwell ✅❌

Key: ✅ = application submitted; 📝 = test received; 📞 = telephone interview; 🎥 = video interview; ❌ = rejection.

*Training Contract applications.

Hey I noticed you have ML VS and TC on here - have you already applied direct TC then? Did you reuse the same application?

 

[AlegalA]

Do people have tips on connecting with trainees/ future trainees on linkedin?
I'm sending connections but I feel like if people don't know you they're unlikely to accept? Would you recommend sending a message with the connection invite (also bearing in mind you can only do that for 5 invites a month).

Tips welcome!!

 

[xxx]

Can any1 suggest good questions to ask at an AC in the interview, ive got some in mind relating to the firm itself but are there any good ones which are bit more general or specific to the interviewers I can ask?

Honestly, from my AC experience (get good feedback on this too) but I always choose a topic (commercial) i.e. trump tariffs and its effects on the construction sector- then ask how it affects the firm. (HAS TO BE A TOPIC VV RELEVANT TO THE FIRM)!!

This normally leads to a discussion between us and I ask follow ups.

For example, in a recent AC i did with a firm that’s focused in mid-market, I asked how the new FCA listing rules for larger corporations are affecting the midmarket and how that’s affecting the firms work?

That then led to a discussion about why the FCA put these rules in place, how the reason why they focused on the big corporation is probably because they thought it would have a trickle down effect on the mid -market and we started discussing how that’s going to affect the legal sector and the opportunities it creates.

I’ve noticed these questions show an interest in both the firms work, build a rapport and show your commercial insight! It show that you don’t just read news but that you are able to think critically on its impacts.

This in my opinion is so much better than asking random questions that lead to a short answer.
It is one of the biggest reasons I’ve passed my ACs even if I flopped their written exercise. Like my interviews usually go over the scheduled time because the partners end up in a debate with me and each other.

 

[Tintin06]

Hey I noticed you have ML VS and TC on here - have you already applied direct TC then? Did you reuse the same application?

More or less the same application. Lots of grammar issues fixed (hopefully).

 

[👩🎓]

Hi @Jessica Booker, I am currently applying for a paralegal role. What type of things should be included in the cover letter? Is it the same structure as a vacation scheme or training contract cover letter? Any advice would be highly appreciated. Thank you

 

[Wompycapy]

can Latham please just put us out of our misery and tell us what they want? its been so longg!!!

From what I have been hearing, Latham usually send out AC invites on very short notice (like 4 days before the AC), and this is likely on purpose. So it can be a possibility that they are just waiting to send out AC invites all at once, which means that no news is good news.

But obviously this is very optimistic thinking so don’t take my words for it…good luck!

 

[ad.]

A firm is requesting me to prove my right to work by sending my national insurance number. I don’t have one yet but applied for one as soon as I received the onboarding email today. I should receive the National Insurance number within 4 weeks from now and my VS starts on the 7th of April, so it’s a bit tight time-wise.
I have read that I can start to work (and even get paid) without a NI number, but I just need to be able to prove my right to work (which I can do through an online visa share code).

I will obviously explain all this to the firm but am still a bit worried — @Jessica Booker in your experience is this likely to be a significant issue? 😅 have you had this kind of experience before especially with international students like myself who don’t necessarily have a NI number

 

[BillSikes]

Hi @Jessica Booker, I am currently applying for a paralegal role. What type of things should be included in the cover letter? Is it the same structure as a vacation scheme or training contract cover letter? Any advice would be highly appreciated. Thank you

you don’t need to actually submit the cover letters lmao.

 

[FCL25]

Is this Addleshaw? If yes, where did they say 17th March please? I’ve not heard anything since doing the VI early Jan but haven’t followed up as I do remember someone saying on the thread they received an automatic holding response

They emailed me to tell me they aim to respond within 10 weeks of the application deadline (6th Jan). This should mean we hear back by 17th March, which is the 10-week mark. They also told me that there were to be multiple ACs running from Jan to March, but I highly doubt they haven't already filled up all the spaces by this point lol.

 

[FCL25]

I haven't heard back (applied on the deadline day) but someone told me they've received an offer already (and their AC was in Jan) - at this point I'm assuming they've given out all ACs but I could be wrong. Lots of firms just prolong their mass PFOs for some reason

It sucks because I initially applied to their direct TC last year (around June) and they reached out to me not long after saying that they had already filled up the spaces for direct TCs but really liked my application so wanted to transfer me to the VS process instead. Essentially this has been a year-long wait for me just to get a PFO ffs 😭😭

 

[weupin2025]

Bit random but if an interview was scheduled for an hour (including questions at the end) and it was 45 minutes including questions is this usually a bad sign?

Hi which firm was this for

 

[BillSikes]

I understand Baker McKenzie are rolling basis. Does anyone know if rolling basis actually matters for Baker? as I know for most firms it is mostly irrelevant.

 

[BillSikes]

you don’t need to actually submit the cover letters lmao.

Two down votes to this. I've list as long of my arm of firms that have offered me interview where I have not submitted cover letter. All firms you will have heard of.

 

[Chris Brown]

I understand Baker McKenzie are rolling basis. Does anyone know if rolling basis actually matters for Baker? as I know for most firms it is mostly irrelevant.

Is this for VS or DTC? If you are asking about DTC, I saw this post a while ago on the other TCLA DTC thread:​

on their site and email after sending the application:

-February 1st 2025 - Applications open.
-February 1st - April 1st 2025 - Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis. All applications will be reviewed prior to online tests being sent out.
-April 1st 2025 - Application deadline.
-April 2025 - Successful candidates sent invite to undertake online tests and a video interview.
-May 2025 - Successful candidates will attend an assessment centre.
-May - June 2025 - Successful candidates will be offered a Training Contract to commence in March or September 2027.

 

[BillSikes]

Is this for VS or DTC? If you are asking about DTC, I saw this post a while ago on the other TCLA DTC thread:​

Yeah I'm looking to apply direct. Are the test and VI sent at the same time then - and not separate stages? I know the test sed to be WG - is this still case?

 

[Chris Brown]

Yeah I'm looking to apply direct. Are the test and VI sent at the same time then - and not separate stages? I know the test sed to be WG - is this still case?

I think the online test and VI will be separate stages, although I’m not fully sure tbh. Here’s the link to their grad rec website which explains the application process for both VS and DTC:

Application Process

uk-graduates.bakermckenzie.com

 

[Amma Usman]

Hiya @BobThebIlly

First off, well done on those impressive scores for assumptions (88%) and evaluating arguments (100%). Those are fantastic and show you’ve really nailed those sections! Let’s focus on the “drawing conclusions” part and see how you can improve in the short time you have.

The Watson Glaser tests your ability to draw conclusions in two specific sections - the deduction section, as well as the inference section.

Deductions: This section tests your ability to make a deduction. With deductions, you are trying to find what follows absolutely and necessarily from the premises you are given, and just assume that all those premises are true. For example:

• Premise 1: All cats have whiskers
• Premise 2: Ram is a cat (this premise is false, but for the purpose of your deduction just assume it's true)
• Conclusion: Ram has whiskers

Notice that, in the above argument, if you assume the initial premises are true, then the conclusion follows necessarily and absolutely. This reflects the way you should be 'drawing conclusions' in the deduction section.

The inference section, by contrast, tests your ability to draw conclusions in more probabilistic ways. They are not asking you to identify what follows absolutely or necessarily. Rather, they involve asking what conclusions are probable or strongly suggested by the evidence though not certain (e.g. follow strongly). For the purposes of the inference section, there are two styles of reasoning that you should become familiar with:

1. Inductions: Imagine you’re a scientist studying bird migration. Over the course of several years, you observe that geese in a particular region always migrate south during the winter. Based on these repeated observations, you draw the conclusion "Geese in this region migrate south every winter." This is a good conclusion to draw because it's based on consistent and repeated evidence. However, it’s not certain (there could be a year when some geese don’t migrate for an unexpected reason, like illness or environmental changes). Induction involves drawing conclusions to make predictions about the future or generalisations about a group based on observed patterns. To understand whether an inference is a strong one, you'll also want to familiarise yourself with the ways people get inductions wrong. These include, but are not limited to:
   • Overgeneralising: This occurs when someone draws a broad conclusion based on too few examples. For instance, seeing two aggressive dogs and concluding that all dogs are aggressive is an overgeneralisation. The sample size is too small to justify the conclusion.
     
     
   • Sampling Bias: Drawing conclusions from an unrepresentative sample can lead to faulty reasoning. For example, surveying only a small group of people from one region and assuming their preferences reflect an entire population’s preferences is misleading.
     
     
   • Ignoring Counterexamples: Inductive reasoning requires considering exceptions, but people sometimes disregard counterexamples that weaken their conclusions. For instance, concluding that "all swans are white" without accounting for black swans ignores evidence that challenges the generalisation. Pay attention to whether the question stem and information you're being offered provides any potential counter evidence.
     
     
   • Confusing causation and correlation: People often assume that because two things happen together, one causes the other. For example, observing that ice cream sales increase in summer alongside shark attacks might lead someone to wrongly conclude that eating ice cream causes shark attacks. In reality, both are linked to a third factor: hot weather.
2. Abductions: This involves selecting the most likely explanation based on the available evidence. For example, if you find fur on your couch and a chewed slipper, you might reasonably conclude that your dog is responsible. While other explanations are logically possible (e.g. such as a neighbour's cat sneaking into your house unnoticed to chew the slipper and shed fur on the couch) - these are far less plausible, especially if you have a dog at home. Abductive reasoning is particularly useful in situations where the evidence is incomplete or ambiguous. It allows us to make practical, reasonable conclusions by focusing on the explanation that best fits the facts. This approach is commonly used in problem-solving, diagnosing issues, and decision-making, as it prioritises what is most likely rather than what is merely possible.

Appreciating these different ways of 'drawing a conclusion' is important because you want to ensure that you're using the appropriate form of reasoning depending on the section you're working on. Mistaking one for another can lead to choosing the wrong answers in that section.

Hope this helps and my apologies in advance for the length of my reply!

hello,

could somebody please give any tips/advice on how to approach links capp and wgt?

thank youuu

Hey there @Law queries ,

I have quoted a past post by @Ram Sabaratnam to help!