Ask A Graduate Recruiter Anything!

[Changes]

Tough crowd....

Saying that I interviewed there a long time ago, and unfortunately I am not surprised...

Would’ve been back in 2009 (I’m old).

 

[Frank]

Had an interview at JP Morgan in first year. As I use a wheelchair, when they asked me my weakness I said “stairs”. It didn’t even get a smile. So I would avoid it ha.

I give you credit for that. The most awkward answer I gave was at Fleishman Hillard in Y2. They asked me how did you end up being the first in a specific competition? I answered, "because I don't lose". Fast forward 2 days and you know the outcome I'm still waiting for their email to know if I got the job

 

[Jessica Booker]

Would’ve been back in 2009 (I’m old).

mine dates back even further than that

 

[S87]

I had interviews where they were shocked to see an Italian black person. I mentioned that I was adopted..ooh how is like to be adopted? My reply is always the same: I got rich..my parents are white!!

You also understand that you do not work there

 

[Jen E C]

Hi Jessica,

In the event that final assessments for TCs are moved online after the VS is postponed, could you give an opinion as to how that might affect the exit interview? As we don't have the benefit of the two weeks in the firm, so cannot experience the work and culture etc, would it be fair to assume it would be very similar to the interview for the VS?

As it then resembles a direct TC route, is the interview for a direct TC typically different to the VS? Or just more that what they are looking for in your answers is different.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Jessica,

In the event that final assessments for TCs are moved online after the VS is postponed, could you give an opinion as to how that might affect the exit interview? As we don't have the benefit of the two weeks in the firm, so cannot experience the work and culture etc, would it be fair to assume it would be very similar to the interview for the VS?

As it then resembles a direct TC route, is the interview for a direct TC typically different to the VS? Or just more that what they are looking for in your answers is different.

This might be a terminology thing, but exit interviews are not about a candidate and not assessed. Exit interviews are about getting feedback on how you found your experience to try and help an employer understand what went well/what didn’t, and therefore how to improve the programme for next year.

“Conversion” interviews (eg converting someone from one programme to another) will vary from firm to firm. But they won’t be any different - they will be assessing the same things as a direct TC applicant. Even in normal years, they always did.

 

[Jen E C]

This might be a terminology thing, but exit interviews are not about a candidate and not assessed. Exit interviews are about getting feedback on how you found your experience to try and help an employer understand what went well/what didn’t, and therefore how to improve the programme for next year.

“Conversion” interviews (eg converting someone from one programme to another) will vary from firm to firm. But they won’t be any different - they will be assessing the same things as a direct TC applicant. Even in normal years, they always did.

Apologies, I'm referring to the conversion interview. Sorry, I'm a bit confused, is there usually much of a difference between the conversion interview and a direct TC interview?

 

[Jessica Booker]

Apologies, I'm referring to the conversion interview. Sorry, I'm a bit confused, is there usually much of a difference between the conversion interview and a direct TC interview?

no, not in terms of structure or what they are looking for (in terms of competencies/strengths/knowledge/motivations). It is just typically a candidate's answer will rely on their experiences at the firm more.

 

[Swathy Iyer]

Hi Jessica,
I am Indian qualified Lawyer with 10 years of work experience primarily into Banking and Finance. I have relocated to UK and taking up the QLTS assessments to be qualified as an English Solicitor. Meanwhile, am I eligible to apply for training contracts? Would my Indian experience add any value? At this stage am I still expected to share and justify my Law school scores?

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Jessica,
I am Indian qualified Lawyer with 10 years of work experience primarily into Banking and Finance. I have relocated to UK and taking up the QLTS assessments to be qualified as an English Solicitor. Meanwhile, am I eligible to apply for training contracts? Would my Indian experience add any value? At this stage am I still expected to share and justify my Law school scores?

if you have ten years experience and are taking the QLTS, a training contract would not be suitable for you.

You’d be eligible but there would be little to no sense in taking you on as a trainee. If you were to apply, you would need to provide your academics and these would be weighed up against the rest of your application.

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Ma'am what is the difference between someone who becomes a trainee after the normal process of TC -> Rotation of seats for 2 years and then becomes a solicitor vs QLTS- who takes the qlts?

 

[Jessica Booker]

Ma'am what is the difference between someone who becomes a trainee after the normal process of TC -> Rotation of seats for 2 years and then becomes a solicitor vs QLTS- who takes the qlts?

Whoever disliked this question, stop being so narrow minded - it’s actually a very legitimate question and one that should be discussed given upcoming changes.

This will all change with the SQE - so this is only applicable for the next 15 months. When the SQE comes and replaces the QLTS - there will only be one route to qualification for all people, no matter what their background.

Currently with the QLTS you have to be qualified in your home jurisdiction. You then take a set of exams (which are basically what the SQE is based on) but do not need to gain any qualifying work experience. Once you complete and pass the QLTS you are a qualified lawyer in England and Wales.

This means you don’t need a training contract. However, some firms will allow people who are taking or have passed the QLTS to join on the equivalent of a training contract. However this is typically for people who come in with little experience, and so working for two years on the same rotational basis as a trainee makes sense. Anyone with significant work experience (typically 3 years or more) would be advised to apply for NQ or qualified roles instead - but they would have needed to have passed the QLTS.

However, this all changes with the SQE. Once the SQE comes in, candidates just need a degree (they don’t need to be qualified in their home country), but even if you were qualified elsewhere, you would need to demonstrate 2 years of working on English law (even if that is outside of the U.K.).

 

[futuretraineesolicitor]

Thank you ma'am.

 

[Swathy Iyer]

if you have ten years experience and are taking the QLTS, a training contract would not be suitable for you.

You’d be eligible but there would be little to no sense in taking you on as a trainee. If you were to apply, you would need to provide your academics and these would be weighed up against the rest of your application.

Thank you Jessica. This helps

 

[Swathy Iyer]

Hi Jessica,
One more from me. Whilst I understand the rationale, that it makes no sense to apply for TC with 10 years of work experience( though not in UK)....but what I understand basis my research is that law firms eventually promote their own TC’s to associate and further higher levels...and even whilst recruiting for positions seek candidates from similar paths...how does one navigate through such situations

 

[Jessica Booker]

Hi Jessica,
One more from me. Whilst I understand the rationale, that it makes no sense to apply for TC with 10 years of work experience( though not in UK)....but what I understand basis my research is that law firms eventually promote their own TC’s to associate and further higher levels...and even whilst recruiting for positions seek candidates from similar paths...how does one navigate through such situations

That is the difficulty with transferring across to the U.K. - it isn’t straight forward for qualified lawyers from other jurisdictions to just step into any role. You need comparable experience (eg with the size/scale/complexity of clients) for a qualified role and it’s often the case that other jurisdictions don’t bring that where English law is used internationally while others less so.

Your best bet is contacting senior U.K. lawyers working on India desks within U.K. firms and being taken on directly as either a qualified lawyer if you have passed the QLTS or as a intern/paralegal/consultant if you haven’t.

That is how most Indian candidates educated and qualified in India came into the firms I worked for.

 

[Jessica Booker]

Big request to everyone. If you are still studying at university, please could you PM me if your university is allowing you to not formally be assessed on all of your modules this year. I have been notified of at least one law faculty doing this (allowing them submit assessments for 3 out of their 6 modules), and I am keen to understand how common an approach it is. I am speaking to graduate recruiters about this to understand their concerns about this too.

 

[R203]

Hi Jessica, if english is my native language but an app form has no such option,

is it considered: fluent, proficient or colloquial? thank you so much!

 

[Changes]

Fluent would be the closest to native...but I’m surprised there isn’t native as an option.

 

[R203]

Fluent would be the closest to native...but I’m surprised there isn’t native as an option.

Thank you so much! Yes I was thinking "fluent" would be the appropriate choice. You wouldn't suppose "colloquial" might be similar to "native"? Might be me overthinking it but isn't colloquial some sort like, so fluent till it becomes informal?

either way, I think fluent is the safest choice.