TCLA Direct Training Contract Applications Discussion Thread 2024-5

[adrian_nlh]

Can I dm you to discuss the Fried Frank application a bit more?

Yes, of course.

 

[Chris Brown]

Back again with the daily ‘has anyone heard anything from Hogan Lovells or Ashurst since yesterday’ question.

Any updates from either at all? Got told I passed WGT for Hogan Lovells around 2 months ago. The waiting is very long.​

 

[AlegalA]

Hi guys does anyone know how much DACB pays nqs? The info isn't on legal cheek, but I was wondering if someone had insider info by any chance?

 

[trainee4u]

Hi guys does anyone know how much DACB pays nqs? The info isn't on legal cheek, but I was wondering if someone had insider info by any chance?

https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/ropes-gray-tells-its-lawyers-be-office-four-days-week said £70k+ in 2023, so a bit more than that.

Less outside London.

 

[SamiyaJ]

Hi guys,

I hope you’re all well!

I’m not posting much nowadays as life is hectic (same as everyone else tbh) and my mental health has taken a bit of a toll.

In terms of applications, I am waiting to hear back from Mayer Brown (pretty sure it’s a PFO as my SJT results weren’t great), Farrer & Co and HFW TC post apps. Need to do some more applications but I have PGDL exams coming up so I’m busy with revision.

In terms of work- I have a good job with decent salary, but we were recently hit with the bombshell that a lot of redundancies are coming as the organisation has to cut millions from the budget by 1 Jan 2026!!! So now that’s another worry.

Probably will sound like such an entitled brat saying this but I’ve had a look for any legal positions available and they either require 50 years of legal experience, or the money is terrible. I don’t mind taking a bit of a cut but the salaries being offered are abysmal and I need money to live and also pay for uni!! So I am thinking of looking for another non-legal position in the meantime, but I’m worried it would give a negative impression on my commitment to law when doing applications.

If there’s any advice anyone can give then I’ll really appreciate it, but I just wanted to get this off my chest 😭

 

[wordyversus]

Is it possible for a firm to give you a TC offer if they liked you on your VS interview well enough ?

 

[Jessica Booker]

Is it possible for a firm to give you a TC offer if they liked you on your VS interview well enough ?

It can happen - its not common though, many firms would want you to go through a TC recruitment process. But I have known a small number of people get TC offers having come through a VS recruitment process successfully.

 

[jacksollaf]

Hey everyone, quick question about King & Spalding post-AC.

1- I suppose no one has heard yet right?
2- I sent an email regarding reimbursement for travels (they said they would reimburse up to 100 pounds). Has anyone requested a reimbursement? I sent an email regarding that but haven't received a reply yet, and to be fair I had to actually travel to get there for the AC; anyone had any responses yet or should I just wait ?

thanks!

 

[millieplatt1]

anyone heard anything from withers recently post test?

 

[User5678]

anyone heard anything from withers recently post test?

gave the test first week march and haven’t heard anything since (apart from feedback report)

 

[a3736y]

Hey everyone, quick question about King & Spalding post-AC.

1- I suppose no one has heard yet right?
2- I sent an email regarding reimbursement for travels (they said they would reimburse up to 100 pounds). Has anyone requested a reimbursement? I sent an email regarding that but haven't received a reply yet, and to be fair I had to actually travel to get there for the AC; anyone had any responses yet or should I just wait ?

thanks!

Hi there! I just got a call from them an hour ago inviting me to the final stage. Re reimbursement they haven't relied to me yet.

 

[GV]

Hi, is RPC direct training contract rolling?

 

[spamelinazoid]

going into the Easter bank holidays with no news from either BM or HL…

As of the end of the bank holidays it will have been nearly 3 months of no news from HL post-app and deadline. It is getting a bit ridiculous.

 

[AlegalA]

https://www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/ropes-gray-tells-its-lawyers-be-office-four-days-week said £70k+ in 2023, so a bit more than that.

Less outside London.

great thank you!!

 

[Tintin06]

going into the Easter bank holidays with no news from either BM or HL…

As of the end of the bank holidays it will have been nearly 3 months of no news from HL post-app and deadline. It is getting a bit ridiculous.

They do prioritise Vac Scheme attendees. They give them c85% of TCs? So we’re dealing with small numbers. Maybe 5-10 direct Training Contracts left. Some DTC only firms still open. Fried Frank along with Paul Hastings. There’s also some other firms open.

 

[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!

Does anyone have tips on passing online assessments? The Watson glaser styles ones? I have reviewed all the breakdowns of each stage, but I just can’t seem to pass. I’ve even done a bunch of practice tests.

I’ve quoted a great post by @Ram Sabaratnam to help.

 

[Amma Usman]

Hi, is RPC direct training contract rolling?

I can’t seem to find this from their site, but in any case I always recommend applying if interested - you never know!

 

[Chris Brown]

Anyone received updates from Hogan Lovells or Ashurst since yesterday?

Seems unlikely we will hear back from either of them until after Easter break now.​

 

[arando]

Hey - does anyone know what the hogan lovells case study is like? (ie is it M&A or something else)

 

[Tintin06]

Hey - does anyone know what the hogan lovells case study is like? (ie is it M&A or something else)

I’m guessing you got the AC? Most case studies are M&A, iirc. Maybe read Stoakes’ Know the City. Commercial Law handbook might help too.