Howard Kennedy holding email, they’ll get back to us in two weeks if we make it to the next stage I.e., WGT 
-
How confident are you in your knowledge of the core LLB/PGDL subjects, including Contract, Tort, Trusts, Land, Criminal, and Public Law?
TCLA is teaming up with BPP for a free interactive event designed to refresh your fundamentals, especially for those interested in or planning to take the SQE. We'll practise multiple choice SQE questions, with prizes for the highest scoring participants!
Register Here
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
- Thread starter Jessica Booker
- Start date
-
- Tags
- vacation scheme
Interesting developments taking place with Trump’s war on DEI of Big Law firms, and how it would impact recruitment of future talents to the respective firms that have made deals. Also would this affect the recruitment policies of the firms satellite offices around the world in the future?
Jessica Booker
Legendary Member
TCLA Moderator
Gold Member
Graduate Recruitment
Premium Member
Forum Team
- Aug 1, 2019
- 15,315
- 21,390
Yes - you might want to wait until your vacation scheme and ask while you are there though.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 696
- 1,266
Hi @Chris Brown to take the questions one at a time:
- Market position: Paul Hastings is a Vault 20 firm (the immediate next tier in general reputation after the V10 in the US, particularly in regards to transactional practices) operating a medium-sized office in the City with a focus on finance/capital markets practices.
- Closest competitors in core practice areas: in the capital markets space, while we could subdivide between competitors in ECM, DCM, CLOs, securitization, and high-yield (and, for the purposes of the interview, perhaps one ought to look up Chambers rankings for all of them) at a general level I would say Paul Hastings' competitors will be some of the Magic Circle firms (in particular, A&O Shearman and Clifford Chance), Latham, White & Case, Weil, and Milbank. For its big ticket lender-side banking and finance practice, the firm's main rivals would be Latham, A&O, Linklaters, Clifford Chance, White & Case, and Milbank. For its private equity investment funds offering, we would be looking at Kirkland, Simpson Thacher, Debevoise, Clifford Chance, and Goodwin.
- Closest US firm competitors: looking at other V20 firms with a focus on finance/capital markets practices, I would say Milbank, Weil, and Ropes & Gray.
- What makes Paul Hastings unique: the firm has market leading expertise in the CLO and hotels & leisure space; and as opposed to many of its finance-focused US competitors it has strong expertise in a set of practices that can be complementary for many transactions, such as employment, real estate, and white collar crime.
- Securitization: securitization essentially involves taking illiquid assets (so, assets that cannot be traded) such as loans, pooling them together, and repackaging them into securities (such as bonds) that can be sold to investors. The pooling of many different assets (such as mortgages, student loans, credit card receivables etc) in theory will provide the investors with greater protection from impact of defaults, which makes buying the package of assets more attractive than purchasing specific assets individually. This is a method used by banks and other lenders to take credit off their balance sheets and transfer risk to investors; freeing them up to loan more money to others. It is also a highly-regulated area of finance following the Great Financial Crisis, so there is a lot of work for lawyers to ensure business remain compliant.
- High-yields products: this refers to the offering of high-yield bonds; sometimes also called 'junk bonds'. The term is used in opposition to investment-grade bonds to refer to bonds issued by companies who are at a higher risk of default. To compensate for it, the companies will have to offer investors significantly higher yields (essentially, higher interest payments) than for investment grade bonds.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 696
- 1,266
In terms of impact as to recruitment and retention, while it remains to be seen how pervasive it is, there are certainly arguments to be made that there will at least be some negative effect on the firms who have gotten most media attention for striking a deal (as of now, Paul, Weiss, Skadden, Milbank, Willkie, and if rumors are to be believed, Kirkland). We have already seen a number of Skadden associates quit, and there are reports of widespread internal discontent. On the partner side as well it is thought that there might be lateral moves from (i) the partners with strong connections to the Democratic Party (such as Kamala Harris' husband, Douglas Emhoff, who is a partner at Willkie) and (ii) the star litigation partners (as many argue striking these deals under the threat of potentially illegal executive orders could damage firms' reputations on the contentious side, especially for representation in cases involving Government interests). Nevertheless, this will likely depend on how many other firms strike their own deals or change their DEI policies, as if this becomes the status quo in the industry, practitioners may have no choice but to accept it.
On the recruitment side, some argue that the firms that have struck deals will become less attractive and thus lose out on top talent, particularly in the US - where there is a lot more competition between firms to recruit candidates with high GPAS from target universities (which is why they employ the 'campus interviews' system). It is however unclear how much the firms themselves will change their recruitment policies in regards to DEI and use of contextual data: as I have seen it reported in the press, the firms generally seem only to say that as part of the deal with the US Administration, they have affirmed their commitment to being compliant with federal anti-discrimination employment rules. Nonetheless, presumably these firms already considered themselves to be compliant before they struck the deal; so perhaps this involves a commitment to compliance with a different interpretation of said rules. Since the details of the agreements have not been published, little can be said as to what this interpretation could be and how major a revision of recruitment policies it requires.
Finally, on the question about impact to recruitment policies of satellite offices, it is again difficult to opine with any level of certainty. If US firms have large satellite offices and if keeping current recruitment policies keeps them in better standing with the relevant foreign government and their foreign practitioners (which would both likely be the case in London), it is plausible this could happen. In my view it is unlikely that the US Administration would be too interested in the employment practices of firms in foreign jurisdictions.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 696
- 1,266
While I have not applied at Paul Hastings nor do I personally know any who interviewed there, I would say the following:
- Take a look at these two TCLA posts on Paul Hastings Interviews from the 2021/2022 cycle - they might give you some idea about what to expect.
- Read up on the firm's finance/capital markets practice areas and try to develop an ability to (i) explain the firm's core practice areas in layman terms; and (ii) explain the similarities and differences between the work done in those practices.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 696
- 1,266
I cannot confirm how accurate this is but I have heard for the spring scheme the firm had 22 attendees.
- Sep 9, 2024
- 696
- 1,266
If it is impossible to change the topic, I would try to look for indirect effects this could have on the firm. Competition law does not operate in a vacuum, and an important development could cause a chain of effects that end up being relevant for many law firms that do not have competition practices. For instance, if the merger control regime in a given jurisdiction becomes significantly more restrictive, this could lead to (i) a decrease in big-ticket dealmaking and (ii) an increase in complex corporate carveouts for the deals that do go through - which could benefits firms specializing in this type of transaction. If a given merger control regime becomes more relaxed (as will likely be the case in the US), the opposite effect could be observed, benefiting law firms operating generalist M&A practices.
Besides merger control, we could again infer some wider impacts. If the courts/antitrust authorities become more active in enforcing abuse of market dominance/cartel rules, this could lead to renegotiations of many current commercial agreements that are in breach of that (such as many of the contracts made by Visa and Mastercard), which could once again benefit firm's transactional departments. Finally, at the most general level, if the competition law regime is successful in increasing competition in the market, the smaller players in many industries could benefit, which could then lead to them being in a position to give work to many law firms.
I could perhaps say that I would like to be considered for their winter vac scheme. I have 2 more summer vac schemes with firms I prefer and hope to get a TC from one of them, but as nothing is certain I don’t want to burn bridges.
Hey! They said they'd reimburse but it might take a while because they have a huge backlog. But you'll deffo hear back.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
- Sticky
- Sticky
