I guess it isn't. I think I see it as low in context because that's the lowest score given in the training and work categories and the other firms I'm applying to are all ranked as A/A*.
-
Hey Guest, do you have a question for graduate recruitment? Gemma Baker from Willkie is live to answer your questions!
-
Get line-by-line feedback on your applications, access to our weekly application workshops, and our law firm profiles. Use the coupon code 'SIXWEEKS' at checkout for 10% off.
TCLA General Discussion Thread #2 (2021)
- Thread starter Jaysen
- Start date
- Status
@Kablahc and @HorsesForCoursesNeighNeighNeigh thank you for your insight! It's really put things in perspective for me
Do Partners, Directors, senior management ever intervene if the HR/recruitment process is not up to standard or generally provides a very inadequate experience for candidates?
Just thought this could be an interesting question for the general thread. Especially as there was an article recently in the Law Gazette discussing how many extra stages legal recruitment requires candidates to go through
Just thought this could be an interesting question for the general thread. Especially as there was an article recently in the Law Gazette discussing how many extra stages legal recruitment requires candidates to go through
It's not a PFO until it's a PFO.
If they gave you a timeliness for when you could expect to hear back, and it's more than a week or so past that, I would follow up. Similarly, if they didn't give you a deadline, I think enough time has gone past that emailing them would be reasonable.
It's never something I have massively thought about, but my feeling is that most senior fee earners will stay out of that side of things unless they're also recruitment partners.
I dare say if a significant portion of the partnership board shared significant concerns about it, they coukd choose to raise the issue, but I think in practice this is unlikely.
My perception is that, notwithstanding carrying out interviews, fee earners are quite isolated against the application process to try and minimise instances of exploiting networks to get friends and family jobs etc (much like what happened with the regional firm whose name i forget a few weeks ago!)
Try and give yourself a wide variety of experiences. If that were me, I would probably take DR, Corp and Employment as you've got a litigious seat, a transactional seat and a more advisory seat.
I guess this would be a case of people wanting to stay in their lanes - it's a pretty big deal to get involved in someone else's department/expertise and suggest they're not performing properly.
That said, if a firm developed a reputation for a poor recruitment process then I'm sure senior people in the firm would take an interest and be concerned about this.
Completely agree with both of these, especially the staying in your lane, keeping to your own fee-earning work and avoiding nepotism issues.
I guess I've just seen and experienced so many disgraceful recruiting practices that I want to help and mentor others when I start my TC in a few months. Plus a friend of mine has secured an NQ role at a City firm in an area he didn't train in purely through a family connection.
I'll have a check to see if I can find it online! I was browsing the paper magazines that came into my office when I had a read of it. It was reviewing legal recruiting as a whole
Candidates for change
The lasting effect of the pandemic on law firm hiring policies - and a candidate's options - looks set to be profound, writes Katharine Freeland
www.lawgazette.co.uk
Voila! Quite interesting insights from firms and recruiters alike from City and regional offices
That's absolutely nuts! Let me guess, is this area one that is highly sought after and seen as glamorous?
It's more on the private client side of things, but involves tax, HNW clients and some contentious trust/probate elements.
In all fairness, I don't particularly mind trainees networking during their TC and making options for themselves; but I am intrigued to see how my journey to finding an NQ role will be in a couple years time
Didn't hear that, but I'm aware of people in top 200 law firms securing TCs where parents are the Partners. I don't want to blackball that ever happening, as you would hope that family doesn't play a part in the decision making process and the candidate gets the job based on merit and performance!
Good luck to them practising in complex tax, trusts, wills and probate without the usual training 😬
I genuinely enjoy reading about nepotistic fuck ups like this because it means that for the next few years at least every other firm will tone it down for the sake of avoiding bad PR.
Oh, in a way I feel like that's a bit less of a leap than I thought, as there's a lot of crossover nowadays. My brother's best friend trained at slaughters and qualified into something corporate-y (I forget what it was) and now does private client at a big firm in that space that he had no connections with. I think he may have done a tax seat as a trainee but that's it. While I'm sure the MC brand helped, in general, that kind of commercial/corporate skillset is actually very useful because of the increasingly business-savvy way UHNWs are structuring their wealth.
So despite the nepotism angle, the move in itself isn't so shocking.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
- Locked
