General Discussion Thread 2020-21

[TCLA Community Assistant]

Thank you @Jessica Booker , as an experienced graduate recruiter from Allen & Overy and Freshfields. Did you recruit people from non RG backgrounds?

As I am very keen on applying to freshfields this summer

Yes - plenty and from a wide range of unis (not just your Baths/St Andrews that are not RG).

 

[Naomi U]

Hi Naomi, thank you so much I have definitely got a lot of reassurance now, and will certainly try and believe in myself! congrats on your TC with Linklaters, they are a very lucky firm to have you!

I'm glad to hear and thank you so much that's so kind

 

[whisperingrock]

Yes - plenty and from a wide range of unis (not just your Baths/St Andrews that are not RG).

What would you say the proportion per intake is between RG/non-RG in terms of getting offers?

 

[Lumree]

What would you say the proportion per intake is between RG/non-RG in terms of getting offers?

Legal Cheek’s ‘Most List’ usually gives a break down for each law firm on the university group its trainees attended. However, as Jessica mentioned, the results are usually skewed towards RG because that’s where a lot of students apply from, not because Non-RG aren’t given offers.

 

[whisperingrock]

Legal Cheek’s ‘Most List’ usually gives a break down for each law firm on the university group its trainees attended. However, as Jessica mentioned, the results are usually skewed towards RG because that’s where a lot of students apply from, not because Non-RG aren’t given offers.

This perspective sort of ignores the fact that most law firms actively court the RG unis (and a sprinkling of non-RG) over most non-RG ones. Like of course more RG students are going to apply if A&O is hosting a dinner just for them and not for London Met.

Edit: Like it almost comes off as victim blaming for the non-RG students who don't feel good enough to apply.

 

[ab01]

This perspective sort of ignores the fact that most law firms actively court the RG unis (and a sprinkling of non-RG) over most non-RG ones. Like of course more RG students are going to apply if A&O is hosting a dinner just for them and not for London Met.

Edit: Like it almost comes off as victim blaming for the non-RG students who don't feel good enough to apply.

Would like @Jessica Booker ’s opinion on this?

 

[ab01]

This perspective sort of ignores the fact that most law firms actively court the RG unis (and a sprinkling of non-RG) over most non-RG ones. Like of course more RG students are going to apply if A&O is hosting a dinner just for them and not for London Met.

Edit: Like it almost comes off as victim blaming for the non-RG students who don't feel good enough to apply.

I totally agree with you, most law firms do not offer events for non-RG universities, not sure why though? Is it because most people from these universities will not meet their entry requirements? As I do know a handful of people on my course who achieved lower in A-levels and therefore do not meet the criteria to apply.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

What would you say the proportion per intake is between RG/non-RG in terms of getting offers?

Depends on the firm and the intake. Can very quite a lot.

But this article may give you can indication across types of firms and regions:

Law firms' preferred universities 2019 - Chambers Student Guide

The student’s guide to careers in the law. Gives the truth about law firms and the Bar. Based on thousands of interviews with trainees, pupils and market sources, this site offers the full package of careers advice to anyone entering the legal profession.

www.chambersstudent.co.uk

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

This perspective sort of ignores the fact that most law firms actively court the RG unis (and a sprinkling of non-RG) over most non-RG ones. Like of course more RG students are going to apply if A&O is hosting a dinner just for them and not for London Met.

Edit: Like it almost comes off as victim blaming for the non-RG students who don't feel good enough to apply.

If you are looking for people with strong academics (particularly sixth form grades), your chances of finding them at a RG uni are going to be much higher than at London Met.

So there is little point going to London Met to “court” students of the vast majority of them aren’t going to demonstrate strong entry grades, compared the Oxford where it will be rare to find someone who hasn’t got that strong academic performance.

But there is an issue of lack of applications from certain universities because of lack of confidence. And that isn’t unique to Non RG unis though. I spent far too much time with certain RG unis trying to improve the number of applications from them, but reality was that was a combination of a lack of confidence and the vast majority of their students wanted to stay in the north and didn’t want to move to London. So it’s not just a confidence thing - it’s also general preferences. Those general preferences also influence things like what the law society or law faculty are willing to to to engage with firms of different types too - and so sometimes the “courting” is not just down to the firms’ preferences but also want the university’s/students’.

Certain RG unis are much more heavily populated by middle class students from the Home Counties who want to work in the city, probably because their parents did. That’s not the case with a lot of other universities.

 

[whisperingrock]

If you are looking for people with strong academics (particularly sixth form grades), your chances of finding them at a RG uni are going to be much higher than at London Met.

So there is little point going to London Met to “court” students of the vast majority of them aren’t going to demonstrate strong entry grades, compared the Oxford where it will be rare to find someone who hasn’t got that strong academic performance.

But don't you think this is going to actively push away suitable candidates from non-RG backgrounds? I understand the rationale, but it makes the recruitment process incredibly unfriendly for anyone who isn't RG educated. In this very thread you have people who need reasurance that they should still apply because of the very recruitment culture this kind of behaviour has created.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

To put it into perspective firms will get more than 25% of their applications from 2 universities alone. Guess what those two universities are? Confidence in applying works both ways - you get a lot of people who are probably over confident just because of the name of their uni.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

But don't you think this is going to actively push away suitable candidates from non-RG backgrounds? I understand the rationale, but it makes the recruitment process incredibly unfriendly for anyone who isn't RG educated. In this very thread you have people who need reasurance that they should still apply because of the very recruitment culture this kind of behaviour has created.

Firms only have so much resource. It isn’t feasible to go out to every university - if it was, more firms would do so (although one benefit of covid has meant moving stuff online is much more accessible).

As I have mentioned above, it’s also about the willingness of the student population, careers service and law faculty at those universities too. It’s actually really hard work to work with some universities more so than others, and that stops some firms actively recruiting from those universities as it just isn’t worth the time and hassle.

I don’t think it should push people from other universities away though. There are plenty of other ways to engage with firms than going along to an event at your specific university.

 

[whisperingrock]

Firms only have so much resource. It isn’t feasible to go out to every university - if it was, more firms would do so (although one benefit of covid has meant moving stuff online is much more accessible).

As I have mentioned above, it’s also about the willingness of the student population, careers service and law faculty at those universities too. It’s actually really hard work to work with some universities more so than others, and that stops some firms actively recruiting from those universities as it just isn’t worth the time and hassle.

I don’t think it should push people from other universities away though. There are plenty of other ways to engage with firms than going along to an event at your specific university.

But it does push people away. Why are the non-RG uni students expected to work that much harder to have the confidence to fight their way into top firms, when some Oxford 2nd year gets to go to a college specific event with Slaughter and May? If the answer is, "the Oxford student is more desireable and likely better than a non-RG student" then say that.

Like I get that this is just good business but it really doesn't mesh well with the whole diversity push law firms are doing right now. These sorts of things should be mitigated, not accepted.

 

[JohanGRK]

Depends on the firm and the intake. Can very quite a lot.

But this article may give you can indication across types of firms and regions:

Law firms' preferred universities 2019 - Chambers Student Guide

The student’s guide to careers in the law. Gives the truth about law firms and the Bar. Based on thousands of interviews with trainees, pupils and market sources, this site offers the full package of careers advice to anyone entering the legal profession.

www.chambersstudent.co.uk

What was it for the MC firms you were recruiting for?

I don't think that there are any non-RG graduates in my intake of about 40 (also MC firm). This seems to be pretty common from what my friends are seeing/telling me. Every intake does have people from leading overseas unis but these unis probably don't fall into what people think of when they say non-RG (NULS, NUS, Sydney & Melbourne, etc.)

 

[JohanGRK]

But it does push people away. Why are the non-RG uni students expected to work that much harder to have the confidence to fight their way into top firms, when some Oxford 2nd year gets to go to a college specific event with Slaughter and May? If the answer is, "the Oxford student is more desireable and likely better than a non-RG student" then say that.

Like I get that this is just good business but it really doesn't mesh well with the whole diversity push law firms are doing right now. These sorts of things should be mitigated, not accepted.

If I were to put my academic hat on, I'd say that there are two discourses here. One is about those who are undeserving of marginalisation/exclusion (BAME, people with disabilities, poorer backgrounds, etc). The other is about those who are deserving of it or who are expected to sack up and take personal responsibility for their lives (students from less prestigious universities, students with weaker grades at one point of their life but no obvious mitigating circumstances). Grad rec spend £millions on the former but can't be bothered to even set up anything more exerting than a Zoom call for the latter.

Edit: I think that this conversation applies to the very, very selective firms that have tonnes of Firsts from Oxbridge and other good unis to sift through. Most firms don't seem to be as picky!

 

[whisperingrock]

If I were to put my academic hat on, I'd say that there are two discourses here. One is about those who are undeserving of marginalisation/exclusion (BAME, people with disabilities, poorer backgrounds, etc). The other is about those who are deserving of it or who are expected to sack up and take personal responsibility for their lives (students from less prestigious universities, students with weaker grades at one point of their life but no obvious mitigating circumstances). Grad rec spend £millions on the former but can't be bothered to even set up anything more exerting than a Zoom call for the latter.

To add to this, the simplest way to remove the university barrier in non covid times would be to host larger events that are open to all. Then all the "confident" students in the event city would attend. But no one seems to have thought of that.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

But it does push people away. Why are the non-RG uni students expected to work that much harder to have the confidence to fight their way into top firms, when some Oxford 2nd year gets to go to a college specific event with Slaughter and May? If the answer is, "the Oxford student is more desireable and likely better than a non-RG student" then say that.

Like I get that this is just good business but it really doesn't mesh well with the whole diversity push law firms are doing right now. These sorts of things should be mitigated, not accepted.

That isn’t the answer though. The answer is called return on investment.

Spending £2,000 + 2 x a day of people’s time going to Oxford is much more likely to result in a hire than spending that time and money at London Met.

 

[whisperingrock]

That isn’t the answer though. The answer is called return on investment.

Spending £2,000 + 2 x a day of people’s time going to Oxford is much more likely to result in a hire than spending that time and money at London Met.

And that's the whole point. Yes, we all know the Oxford student is better and more desireable, regardless of what words you couch it in. So why all the hypocrisy? Why push it off on the non-RG students? Why preach diversity and equal opportunity when clearly that isn't the case?

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

To add to this, the simplest way to remove the university barrier in non covid times would be to host larger events that are open to all. Then all the "confident" students in the event city would attend. But no one seems to have thought of that.

These events do happen and have been since at least 2005 when I started out. If you are suggesting that firms only do those large events and don’t go to individual universities, then this just isn’t practical.

How would a student with a very low income or who has caring commitments from Manchester be able to attend an event a large event in London that would cost the best part of a day of their time and several hundred pounds to travel down by train?

 

[Tim Buktu]

That isn’t the answer though. The answer is called return on investment.

Spending £2,000 + 2 x a day of people’s time going to Oxford is much more likely to result in a hire than spending that time and money at London Met.

But doesn't this contribute to perpetuating the lack of diversity that most firms have advertised their commitment to reducing?