TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2023-24

[mattyh23]

Following on from the discussion on memos yesterday, do these tend to have an introduction, or is an executive summary an introduction, then you just go into your points with headings?

 

[AlexJ]

This is quite a pedantic question, but in written exercises, is it preferable to use “I” or “we” when giving advice to a client?

In my paralegal job, I’m always told to use “we” to represent the firm (e.g. “we would advise”) but I don’t know if this was more firm specific and it would be odd if I was referring to myself in the plural.

It’s probably not something that makes a difference but any thoughts @Jessica Booker?

This tends to depend on whether the letter is signed from an individual or on behalf of the firm

 

[laby201]

This tends to depend on whether the letter is signed from an individual or on behalf of the firm

Thanks Alex So if you’re advising a client directly via email say, you’d advise just going with first person singular for clarity?

 

[bangarangbass39]

Just a question about references.

I have handed in a CV with volunteer and work experience.

I'm interested in what companies including law firms look for when checking up on your employment and volunteering history?

Do they check on the role and things you did as well? Or do they mostly just ask whether you were there and at that time stated exactly? I say this because for some roles which had unofficial titles I made them up. I only did this because the responsibilities I had were very clear but the role titles weren't.

Also I mentioned programmes I did online - like the AS access programme and the Legal Cheek Vac Scheme. I clarified with recruitment that it is not official work experience where I had responsibilities or carried out certain duties that entail a work experience. I'm just interested if firms check up on this as well or are experiences like this of no interest to recruitment to follow up on?

 

[AlexJ]

Thanks Alex So if you’re advising a client directly via email say, you’d advise just going with first person singular for clarity?

It’s unlikely as a junior you would be advising a client directly. I imagine that different firms would have different policies over what is signed off in what way.

 

[laby201]

It’s unlikely as a junior you would be advising a client directly. I imagine that different firms would have different policies over what is signed off in what way.

Sounds like it’s perhaps better to go for the plural then to reflect it’s on behalf of the firm (if writing as a trainee as you said). I suppose it’s not something that will make a considerable impact anyway!

 

[SR99]

@Jessica Booker Would you or anyone have a list of West End firms by any chance?

 

[Jessica Booker]

This is quite a pedantic question, but in written exercises, is it preferable to use “I” or “we” when giving advice to a client?

In my paralegal job, I’m always told to use “we” to represent the firm (e.g. “we would advise”) but I don’t know if this was more firm specific and it would be odd if I was referring to myself in the plural.

It’s probably not something that makes a difference but any thoughts @Jessica Booker?

Something like this really won’t matter.

 

[Jessica Booker]

@Jessica Booker Would you or anyone have a list of West End firms by any chance?

I don’t have these details unfortunately.

 

[hannah04]

@Jessica Booker @axelbeugre or anyone else, do you have any advice for situational strengths tests? I can never seem to get past this stage. How can we determine what the firm is looking for in terms of values? is there a "right" answer or top strength we should try to achieve?

 

[amy2002]

This might be a strange question, but is there a reason that fellow candidates at more "prestigious" firms tend to be more standoffish or less personable?

I've done 6 assessment centres this cycle (only 1 VS, so not the best conversion rate, but I'm happy about it still!) and I've noticed a trend depending on the type of firm I go to. In the ACs I had with Clifford Chance, HSF, and Linklaters, all the other candidates were pretty unfriendly. When I tried to initiate conversations with them, they didn't engage or were blunt. I very much got the impression that they were solely focused on the interview and saw everyone else as competition. It put me on edge if I'm honest and was hard to feel comfortable.

However, the other 3 ACs I had at Taylor Wessing, Addleshaw Goddard, and Mills & Reeve, which I'd say are less competitive, everyone was really friendly and wanted to get to know me as a person. I still talk to two of the people I met.

Is this indicative of the culture I would expect at each of those firms? The vibe I got at the first three put me off so am wondering if others have had similar experiences?

 

[LehmanBrothersRiskManagementIntern]

This might be a strange question, but is there a reason that fellow candidates at more "prestigious" firms tend to be more standoffish or less personable?

I've done 6 assessment centres this cycle (only 1 VS, so not the best conversion rate, but I'm happy about it still!) and I've noticed a trend depending on the type of firm I go to. In the ACs I had with Clifford Chance, HSF, and Linklaters, all the other candidates were pretty unfriendly. When I tried to initiate conversations with them, they didn't engage or were blunt. I very much got the impression that they were solely focused on the interview and saw everyone else as competition. It put me on edge if I'm honest and was hard to feel comfortable.

However, the other 3 ACs I had at Taylor Wessing, Addleshaw Goddard, and Mills & Reeve, which I'd say are less competitive, everyone was really friendly and wanted to get to know me as a person. I still talk to two of the people I met.

Is this indicative of the culture I would expect at each of those firms? The vibe I got at the first three put me off so am wondering if others have had similar experiences?

It really depends on many things and I wouldn’t necessarily generalise. For example, when I did the vac scheme at a MC firm, a lot of other people on the vac scheme were nice. However, there were a few confrontational and “arrogant” ones. So it really depends. And associates and partners were really nice, so I wouldn’t judge the firm solely because of people you met at the AC.

From my personal experience, this is not about the type of firm. It just depends on the people you end up with during the AC. In my previous ACs with two US firms, I met some of the most “unfriendly” people. However, in the third AC with another US firm, people in my group were nice. I didn’t notice anything inappropriate.

anyone who sees you as competition and acts inappropriately won’t get far. During the vac scheme, grad rec is taking into account a lot of things. I know someone who didn’t get the TC due to not being collaborative and being a self-centred person. As I said before, this also happens in other firms. It just depends on who you end up meeting.

 

[bangarangbass39]

It really depends on many things and I wouldn’t necessarily generalise. For example, when I did the vac scheme at a MC firm, a lot of other people on the vac scheme. However, there were a few confrontational and “arrogant” ones. So it really depends. And associates and partners were really nice, so I wouldn’t judge the firm solely because of people you met at the AC.

From my personal experience, this is not about the type of firm. It just depends on the people you end up with during the AC. In my previous ACs with two US firms, I met some of the most “unfriendly” people. However, in the third AC with another US firm, people in my group were nice. I didn’t notice anything inappropriate.

anyone who sees you as competition and acts inappropriately won’t get far. During the vac scheme, grad rec is taking into account a lot of things. I know someone who didn’t get the TC due to not being collaborative and being a self-centred person. As I said before, this also happens in other firms. It just depends on who you end up meeting.

I think people get nervous and don’t want to give a bad image or anything.

In my AC which was not a US or MC/SC but a European firm, everyone was silent. Especially when we were with trainees who were just chatting to us at the end of the whole process for like an hour. The trainees had to force convo. It sucked but I realised people were nervous, and I knew this because so was I.

I tried really hard to be talkative and asked loads of questions but felt I was dominating which isn’t a good thing to show. Looking back it’s good to be that way. Asking questions, talking about anything. Breaking the silence and stopping the white noise creeping in.

Without doing It’s bad, because you either come off like the person said - competitive and self centered. Or you just seem stuck in your head. I think that’s even worse because the weight of the occasion is so much that not talking to anyone makes the process even more dreadful.

I will admit some people are just arrogant. But again I think it’s a facade. People are nervous and slightly insecure because of the dynamic so they’ll project something that won’t help them.

 

[midnightsky990422]

Thank you and the Birmingham office!!

Congrats!! I’m waiting to hear for their Bham office. I’m wondering if they sent out all acceptances today and rejections will follow soon

 

[futuretrainee202X]

Anything from Winston? Also, if anyone has applied previously, when did you hear back from them?

 

[Jessica Booker]

On the vacation scheme/type of attendees discussion, I suspect this comes down to a mixture of things

1) Luck (good or bad) - sometimes you just get a good/bad combination of candidates at one AC, and then the one the following week is completely the opposite. It is not uncommon for behaviours can be copied and escalated pretty quickly amongst a small group of candidates.

2) If you see a strong pattern, maybe it is more about your preferences rather than the firms/candidates. The recruitment process is a good way to find out if the firm is the type of place you'd like to work in the future, and if you have a strong feeling that those you are around are not your type of people, it may just be that the firm is not the right one for you.

 

[midnightsky990422]

On the vacation scheme/type of attendees discussion, I suspect this comes down to a mixture of things

1) Luck (good or bad) - sometimes you just get a good/bad combination of candidates at one AC, and then the one the following week is completely the opposite. It is not uncommon for behaviours can be copied and escalated pretty quickly amongst a small group of candidates.

2) If you see a strong pattern, maybe it is more about your preferences rather than the firms/candidates. The recruitment process is a good way to find out if the firm is the type of place you'd like to work in the future, and if you have a strong feeling that those you are around are not your type of people, it may just be that the firm is not the right one for you.

Do firms tend to send AC invites in batches per office/ random batches or is it acceptances all at once and rejections all at once? It looks like Gateley have started to send invites for the office I applied for and I haven’t heard yet, so wondering if PFOs will follow later

 

[EMB]

Anyone applied to PMC? I did but can’t see my app on their portal. I wrote them an email to confirm receipt of my application since I never got a confirmation email either but no response from them.

I got a response saying, "Please be reassured that we have received your application and is currently under review" I have not heard anything further, this was on the 19th

 

[sm99]

Thank you!! I haven’t seen anyone else post on the thread for the Birmingham office, so fingers crossed!!

Congrats!! I’m waiting to hear for their Bham office. I’m wondering if they sent out all acceptances today and rejections will follow soon

 

[corplawperson23]

Does anyone have any tips for preparing for a vacation scheme? Is there much you can do?