TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[trainee4u]

It seems people also judge others based on the material, size (fit), brand and price of their suit as well. Idk why it’s like this lmao. It’s probably a classism thing. 🫤​

I'm not sure it's material, brand or price.

This is the Japanese Ambassador, who is always immaculate.

He is very popular in the UK and part of this is obviously his enthusiasm and charm, but also his attention to detail in his appearance, as illustrated in this picture: never a hair out of place, tie dimpled, the spread collar matches with the tie knot, the lapel pin, etc. You can say "that costs money", which it obviously does, but it's not identical with having a garishly-branded LV bag or something: he's not saying "I have money", which a statement bag does do, but saying "I care about my appearance and the impression I convey to others". Whether his suits are by a particular tailor or designer is purely incidental.

 

[Chris Brown]

I find it so annoying when people drag class into everything. Firstly, it's really easy to find professional-looking attire that is not too expensive -- uniqlo, zara and H&M should have simple-cut suits in normal colours for less than £60. Besides, for a vac scheme, you'll find most interns wear one suit and change their shirt. Secondly, it isn't about judging you social class, it's about being dressed appropriately for the circumstance – that means not being underdressed, but not overdressed either!
Re your point about character, if you show up looking like a slob to prove a point it's bound to rub people the wrong way, and rightfully so!
Realistically, as long as your clothes are clean and shirts ironed you'll be fine, it's a vacation scheme not Suits.

I’m not sure if this was intentional, but there’s no need to be rude my friend. It’s really not that serious lmfao. Like you said, it’s a vacation scheme, not suits. I think classism plays a role in a lot of the discussions around what is and isn’t appropriate to wear, in the context of city law anyway. That has become abundantly clear by some of the responses I’m seeing on this forum. It amazes me that there are some people who can be so judgemental. 🥲🥲

As I said before, there may be some people, on this forum or elsewhere, that will genuinely struggle to afford even a basic suit from the places that you mentioned (Zara, H&M, etc). I thankfully have a range of suits which (based on what a lot of you have said), seem to be appropriate for a VS. I’m probably going to get some quarter-zips and plain shirts though, to see what works and what doesn’t work. The general consensus appears to be blue or grey colours + white shirts that will match. 😅😅

The same can’t be said for everyone, so to describe someone as ‘showing up looking like a slob’ if they were to come to a VS wearing a suit that you or others deem inappropriate, is very belittling and disrespectful. In my opinion, the only reason why a suit would ‘rub people the wrong way’, is if they were classist or had very traditional beliefs. Nobody is intentionally rocking up to a VS to look like a slob, so to suggest this is an exaggeration. 🥲🥲​

I think that's a bit exaggerated: you can buy a cheap second-hand suit and wear it to your one-week VS (or a new one, and return it, as I suggested), and people are not going to judge you because it's polyester or whatever. It's however a part of the research process of becoming a lawyer to at least be aware of what might be considered faux pas (brown shoes or whatever), and then the easiest thing is to avoid making them.

In the long term, if they're paying you £100k+/year and the firm wishes to projects an image of polished perfectionism, then it's reasonable to expect lawyers to present accordingly, which might just mean getting a properly-fitted off-the-peg suit, which would certainly be affordable as a trainee or NQS.

My bad lmao. I was speaking about VS’ specifically. I imagine if someone was a trainee earning £50-70k per year, or an NQ associate earning £150-180k, then of course it is perfectly reasonable for a firm to expect them to wear ‘properly-fitted off-the-peg suits.’ I don’t think I ever implied the opposite. It’s also perfectly fine that city law firms would want to exhibit an image of polished perfectionism and professionalism. I would try to make sure I had an entire wardrobe collection of tailor made suits in advance of commencing a £170/180k TC lmao. My original comment on affordability was about buying professional attire or workplace suits for a VS specifically. Apologies for any confusion that I may have caused. 🥲🥲

Edit: I am not willing to get into a back and forth on the forum about this topic. If you want to discuss it, feel free to PM me and we can for sure continue the conversation in PM.​

 

[Jessica Booker]

It seems people also judge others based on the material, size (fit), brand and price of their suit as well. Idk why it’s like this lmao. It’s probably a classism thing. 🫤​

To be fair, pretty much everyone makes judgements on appearance in some way. I can spot a fantastic pair of high heel shoes a mile away and think someone is fab just for wearing them 😆

It is just whether anyone lets that judgement seep into how they then perceive someone's ability to do a job. Some will argue that how you can come across can impact your ability, but I think this is where biases and assumptions over take reality.

 

[Jessica Booker]

By the way, shirts don't always need to be white. Light blues and even very light pinks can often work nicely from what I have seen.

 

[Jessica Booker]

I find it so annoying when people drag class into everything. Firstly, it's really easy to find professional-looking attire that is not too expensive -- uniqlo, zara and H&M should have simple-cut suits in normal colours for less than £60. Besides, for a vac scheme, you'll find most interns wear one suit and change their shirt. Secondly, it isn't about judging you social class, it's about being dressed appropriately for the circumstance – that means not being underdressed, but not overdressed either!
Re your point about character, if you show up looking like a slob to prove a point it's bound to rub people the wrong way, and rightfully so!
Realistically, as long as your clothes are clean and shirts ironed you'll be fine, it's a vacation scheme not Suits.

I am sensitive to this, as I have experienced how classism has presented itself multiple times when people have judged others by their appearance/what they are wearing. This has been directed at me and at other people enough times for it to be something I will always be vocal about. As I stressed earlier, attitudes are shifting, but it is something that unfortunately exists, but maybe that's just because ultimately most people are judgemental that its always going to hang around one way or another.

It has worked the other way round though - I have seen people raise eyebrows when a vac schemer has brought a £25k+ Birkin in as their handbag.

 

[trainee4u]

The government recognises being unable to make appropriate clothing choices for a particular occasion as an aspect of disability (typically autism), scoring 2 points on a PIP assessment.

I think it is helpful for neurodiverse (would-be) lawyers to be aware that something that they might not personally perceive as significant, or notice, is inevitably affecting how they are perceived by others. Traditional dress standards, including shoes, suit, etc. colours, can help such individuals, by providing rules and structure.

 

[Jessica Booker]

The government recognises being unable to make appropriate clothing choices for a particular occasion as an aspect of disability (typically autism), scoring 2 points on a PIP assessment.

I think it is helpful for neurodiverse (would-be) lawyers to be aware that something that they might not personally perceive as significant, or notice, is inevitably affecting how they are perceived by others. Traditional dress standards, including shoes, suit, etc. colours, can help such individuals, by providing rules and structure.

I get where this is coming from, but put frankly, it just feels like another way of putting the blame on another group of people (this time neurodivergent people) for not fitting into a rigid mould.

Saying that traditional dress codes are "helpful" kind of ignores the fact that those rules were never made with everyone in mind - in fact they were usually made by a very specific set of people within very limited demographics. It ends up sounding like, “just follow the rules and you’ll be fine,” when actually the rules themselves are part of the problem.

Not everyone grows up learning these unspoken codes that were made by a very small minority of people (who just happen to have the most power) and pretending they’re neutral just reinforces that divide.

We are talking about a colour of a suit here, not turning up wearing a stained and distressed t-shirt with profanities on it. That is how small the subtleties in judgement can be, which is, in my opinion, ludicrous.

 

[trainee4u]

I get where this is coming from, but put frankly, it just feels like another way of putting the blame on another group of people (this time neurodivergent people) for not fitting into a rigid mould.

Saying that traditional dress codes are "helpful" kind of ignores the fact that those rules were never made with everyone in mind - in fact they were usually made with a very specific set of demographics in mind. It ends up sounding like, “just follow the rules and you’ll be fine,” when actually the rules themselves are part of the problem.

Not everyone grows up learning these unspoken codes that were made by a very small minority of people and pretending they’re neutral just reinforces that divide.

It's not putting the blame on anyone, I am speaking from my own personal experience.

I have always (up to the present day) been pretty much indifferent to my appearance, and have also in the past been mostly close to people who are not particularly bothered. More recently I have close personal relationships with people who are much more focused on their own appearance and I have found this helpful, and would have benefited from it in the past, in that they will highlight things that I don't care about but they do (and therefore so do others).

In addition, being indifferent, I would simply not notice the difference between one style of male dress and another, because this was not something I was interested in or paying attention to. However, by reading about it and therefore informing myself of the specific differences, such as collar styles, tie knots, etc., it becomes a series of rules or separate items, rather than a more amorphous "clothes", and I also thereby became more appreciative of the visual impression that is conveyed, which again is helpful from my own perspective, in attempting to emulate that.

I don't see the class origins of dress codes as affecting whether they can be helpful to neurodiverse people by providing formal structure and rules. I know that there are law firms that claim to be disability confident, offer guaranteed interviews, etc., but these turn out to be "terms and conditions apply", such that they probably don't mean much at all. I would therefore, personally speaking, prefer to be aware of the rules and faux pas, rather than hope over experience that the world is understanding, particularly given how many people don't care about whether you are neurodiverse and will consciously/unconsciously discriminate against you.

 

[berocca567]

Sorry to interrupt the dress code conversation.

I was wondering in application questions, when you come across a 'What is your proudest achievement' type of question, does it have to be something interesting that really stands out? I.e. my real proudest achievement is getting a first at university, but would this be too boring an answer? What sort of thing do other people put?

 

[S7321]

I have an AC coming up which will include a written exercise and a group presentation / project - but no interviews. Does anyone have a sense of what these will entail and how to prepare? It feels like there's a limited amount you can actually do!

 

[Jessica Booker]

Sorry to interrupt the dress code conversation.

I was wondering in application questions, when you come across a 'What is your proudest achievement' type of question, does it have to be something interesting that really stands out? I.e. my real proudest achievement is getting a first at university, but would this be too boring an answer? What sort of thing do other people put?

More than welcome to interrupt!

I would recommend finding something more unique unless there are some particular circumstances that made it more challenging for you to achieve a first.

It will just be a common achievement but if there are more unique circumstances to demonstrate why this would be different to someone else who had also achieved a first, then it would be okay to use.

 

[User5678]

Sorry to interrupt the dress code conversation.

I was wondering in application questions, when you come across a 'What is your proudest achievement' type of question, does it have to be something interesting that really stands out? I.e. my real proudest achievement is getting a first at university, but would this be too boring an answer? What sort of thing do other people put?

I would suggest find something unique, which the interviewer will remember and feel impressed by. Getting a first is a big achievement ofc but I believe a lot of people get it.

For example - i always say getting a global excellence scholarship at university for the full duration of my course. This usually puts a good impression!

Hope this helps!

 

[trainee4u]

On the topic of application questions, is there generally a difference between VI questions and application form questions in terms of what you could be asked and how to answer it?

I have collected my application form questions, which tend to be 250-300 words, and have answers to everything I've ever been asked (some answered probably better than others!).

Then in a VI I think there's likely to be one or two firm-specific questions, such as "why do you want to work for Sue, Grabbit, & Run LLP" and "which of our practice areas interests you most, and why", as well as some generic questions such as "how do you cope under pressure?". I think sometimes they might make these questions two-part, presumably to make it more difficult.

However, I just wonder whether you can literally read out your set of application form questions (having perhaps rehearsed and recorded them before hand, as well as preparing one or two scripts for firm-specific questions).

I was just watching a couple of "life as a trainee" video, and the first one appeared to be reading from a script in answer to prepared questions, and it came across clearly and the video was also exactly 5:00, which suggests good time management. The second was a couple of minutes longer and did not appear to have been scripted and was harder to follow due to hesitations etc.

My takeaway is that trainee 1 has put more effort in, by carefully writing the words, and especially as this is selling a law firm, this is the ideal approach.

Trainee 1 might have recorded several times and clearly was given the questions in advance, which is not the case on a VI. However, I'm just wondering whether I can attempt to follow a similar approach to improve my VI answers.

 

[theruleofno]

I have an AC coming up which will include a written exercise and a group presentation / project - but no interviews. Does anyone have a sense of what these will entail and how to prepare? It feels like there's a limited amount you can actually do!

I assume this is Orrick? I am in the same boat. They seem to have changed it a lot from previous years. We get a lot of prep time for the presentation

 

[Chris Brown]

On the topic of application questions, is there generally a difference between VI questions and application form questions in terms of what you could be asked and how to answer it?

I have collected my application form questions, which tend to be 250-300 words, and have answers to everything I've ever been asked (some answered probably better than others!).

Then in a VI I think there's likely to be one or two firm-specific questions, such as "why do you want to work for Sue, Grabbit, & Run LLP" and "which of our practice areas interests you most, and why", as well as some generic questions such as "how do you cope under pressure?". I think sometimes they might make these questions two-part, presumably to make it more difficult.

However, I just wonder whether you can literally read out your set of application form questions (having perhaps rehearsed and recorded them before hand, as well as preparing one or two scripts for firm-specific questions).

I was just watching a couple of "life as a trainee" video, and the first one appeared to be reading from a script in answer to prepared questions, and it came across clearly and the video was also exactly 5:00, which suggests good time management. The second was a couple of minutes longer and did not appear to have been scripted and was harder to follow due to hesitations etc.

My takeaway is that trainee 1 has put more effort in, by carefully writing the words, and especially as this is selling a law firm, this is the ideal approach.

Trainee 1 might have recorded several times and clearly was given the questions in advance, which is not the case on a VI. However, I'm just wondering whether I can attempt to follow a similar approach to improve my VI answers.

To my understanding, the general expectation in a VI is to expand on written application answers and not to simply memorise and regurgitate what is already written (the person who read the application is most likely the person reviewing the VI so they can identify this quickly). I also don’t think it’s ideal to rehearse scripted answers to questions that you think may come up. I think this would most likely lead someone to try answer questions that aren’t even being asked by shoehorning in prepared answers. VI are generally very short (30-60 seconds prep and 60-90 seconds to answer), so I think it’s important to keep answers clear and concise. Good time management is of course very important. 😅

In my experience with Willkie, it seemed it was okay to make the same initial point, but the reasoning that followed had to be different. For example, if I had wrote in my application that I was interested in private equity for reasons ABC, in the VI, I could similarly state I was interested in private equity, but for reasons XYZ. I don’t think firms would expect fundamental motivations to change between an application and VI, but they might expect to see more research into their firm within that time period, which means VI answers need to be more specific and developed. I think if the fundamental motivations changed, that would probably be seen as a red flag. I think natural pauses and hesitations are normal tbh. 🙂​

 

[tcla02]

@Ram Sabaratnam @Andrei Radu i had two questions: 1. what are the benefits of a firm having a single management structure? 2. what are the differences between a firm’s corporate securities and corporate securities technology department? thank you!

 

[abbiewhitlock03]

Hi - I was wondering if anyone had some thoughts on what would be appropriate to include in the following question for my Farrer & Co training contract application. I have a place on the firm's summer vacation scheme, but I believe you have to submit a DTC application to be considered for a TC following the scheme.

"Legal Work Exposure (eg. open days, vacation schemes, shadowing, or any other work to show your commitment to law). (350 words)"

I have a couple experiences I can draw from, e.g. my placement year, work experience etc. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to include vacation schemes I have not yet completed (e.g. my F&Co offer, and others I hold)? Normally I would not include these in an application until after I had completed them, but I guess the wording of the question tells me that maybe I could include that I have those offers to show my commitment to law?

Thank you!

 

[trainee4u]

Hi - I was wondering if anyone had some thoughts on what would be appropriate to include in the following question for my Farrer & Co training contract application. I have a place on the firm's summer vacation scheme, but I believe you have to submit a DTC application to be considered for a TC following the scheme.

"Legal Work Exposure (eg. open days, vacation schemes, shadowing, or any other work to show your commitment to law). (350 words)"

I have a couple experiences I can draw from, e.g. my placement year, work experience etc. I was wondering if it would be appropriate to include vacation schemes I have not yet completed (e.g. my F&Co offer, and others I hold)? Normally I would not include these in an application until after I had completed them, but I guess the wording of the question tells me that maybe I could include that I have those offers to show my commitment to law?

Thank you!

They said during the AC that if you ticked the 'training contract' in addition to 'vacation scheme' when you applied via allhires it is not necessary to make a separate application for the TC.

 

[trainee4u]

To my understanding, the general expectation in a VI is to expand on written application answers and not to simply memorise and regurgitate what is already written (the person who read the application is most likely the person reviewing the VI so they can identify this quickly). I also don’t think it’s ideal to rehearse scripted answers to questions that you think may come up. I think this would most likely lead someone to try answer questions that aren’t even being asked by shoehorning in prepared answers. VI are generally very short (30-60 seconds prep and 60-90 seconds to answer), so I think it’s important to keep answers clear and concise. Good time management is of course very important. 😅

In my experience with Willkie, it seemed it was okay to make the same initial point, but the reasoning that followed had to be different. For example, if I had wrote in my application that I was interested in private equity for reasons ABC, in the VI, I could similarly state I was interested in private equity, but for reasons XYZ. I don’t think firms would expect fundamental motivations to change between an application and VI, but they might expect to see more research into their firm within that time period, which means VI answers need to be more specific and developed. I think if the fundamental motivations changed, that would probably be seen as a red flag. I think natural pauses and hesitations are normal tbh. 🙂

I think @Andrei Radu, @Amma Usman, @Ram Sabaratnam and and @Jessica Booker can give a much better answer than this though. 🥲​

To clarify, I probably have at least 30 different questions that I've answered in application forms, and the specific application questions for the VI (Fox Williams) I'm preparing for were:

1. why should we select you? what sets you apart from other candidates?
2. which of our core sectors appeals to you most?
3. impact of AI on the law.

So I therefore have quite a few personalised answers to questions such as "what's your proudest achievement" that I've given in written applications, that they wouldn't have read/heard before.

They've said that there are "three very different questions", which will "test your research into Fox Williams, your communication skills, and about you as an individual"

So the first part of that could be

"why do you want to work for us" or

"what sets us apart from our competitors"

and then the others could be anything, e.g., "tell us about a time when you have had to manage difficult people", "tell us about a person who inspires you", etc.

 

[abbiewhitlock03]

They said during the AC that if you ticked the 'training contract' in addition to 'vacation scheme' when you applied via allhires it is not necessary to make a separate application for the TC.

I double checked cos I thought I remembered they had mentioned this too, but I only ticked the vacation scheme option (for some reason... current me is disliking past me) so I am making a TC application in case.