TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25

[jojo23]

It’s just people’s preferences - the thing about a grey or blue suit is it won’t offend the few people who think a black suit is a no go. But plenty of people won’t even notice you are wearing a black suit. It isn’t that there’s different expectations for VS candidates to anyone else working in the firm though.

You could say it's also style too, what suits your complexions, complements your skin tone etc., for example i think navy suits look better on me than grey

 

[Chris Brown]

While I don't agree with someone judging another on the price or brand of their suit. I think it's important to look presentable and put together in a client-facing career. The way someone presents themselves is reflective of thier character.

That’s fair enough, but it’s also important to remember that not everyone can afford to spend £100s on perfectly tailored suits, which would of course look a lot more presentable than a regular suit. I don’t think anyone can or should draw a conclusion on someone’s character based on what they are wearing either. That sounds a bit mad in my opinion. It’s a very classist thing to do. I guess that’s the reality of city law though. 🤷🏾‍♂️​

 

[jojo23]

While I don't agree with someone judging another on the price or brand of their suit. I think it's important to look presentable and put together in a client-facing career. The way someone presents themselves is reflective of thier character.

just dress like you're the main character

 

[Amma Usman]

Wow, I can’t believe this cycle is nearly over. Honestly, I couldn’t have done it without the support of everyone at TCLA—the advice, encouragement, and thoughtful comments made such a difference.

I’ve managed to secure 3 vacation scheme offers and I’m still waiting to hear back from my final one (Ropes – fingers crossed!). Coming from a completely different background, working full-time, and being a bit older than most, I often felt really out of place. But reading other people’s stories on here helped me feel so much less alone—and reminded me that there’s no “one” path into law.

If anyone ever wants to chat or needs advice about anything, please feel free to reach out. I’m more than happy to help.

Thank you all so much

Congratulations! Very well deserved and hope you celebrate well.

 

[Amma Usman]

I’m writing this post because this feed has genuinely been a saviour this application season. I felt so seen and understood.


My biggest tip for interviews:

Commercial:

1. Always speak in terms of the client. (The best way is to imagine you are that client…. What would you want out of your lawyer. That’s your starting point for any suggestion)
2. Give the pros and cons of every approach for the client. Why approach 1 suits the clients values and expectations more than 2. Why this approach would give the client what they want.
3. When they grill you…. AND THEY WILL…. If you feel uncertain or you get to the answer they are pushing you towards… ASK WHY? Why this is the best approach considering xyz for the client.

Let me give you an example,

In one assessment centre, we were discussing the different funding options for the client.m

- Our client was dealing with a Heads of Terms required the full payment on completion.
- Thus, our client needed to have a guarantee that they had the funds to pay the full price before anything is signed.

Q. How would they guarantee they have the funds? And how is the best way for them to raise these funds?

A: get a loan from a bank

My answer: debt (Bond) or equity (IPO) financing.

My answer wasn’t actually incorrect, but it wasn’t the best thing for our client at the time. They made me think about getting a guarantee from the bank and taking out loan and once I got to the answer, I thought…. Wouldn’t they have to pay high interest then?? Equity is better for this deal.


So, I asked. I said given that the bank loan would carry a high interest rate wouldn’t it better be better for our clients to do equity financing for that reason? And then this led to a discussion where they taught me and debated the pros and cons.


Outcome: the partner gave an amazing review. I showed that I was curious, open to learn and easy to teach. Qualities you can’t show from previous experience… you have to prove it.

I genuinely think this conversation was why I got a congratulatory email from the partner weeks after I interviewed and found out the outcome. They personally emailed saying that they were excited to have me on board.

HR/ motivation/ competency:

- TREAT THEM AS A NEW FRIEND YOU ARE GETTING TO KNOW.
- this builds rapport, makes you seem approachable and lessens tension ( we started talking about mutual interests).
- Prepare ideas and not responses. For example think about different experiences that can be applied to different questions and just remember the facts of these experiences and what they taught you but do not write a full answer to any interview question you can practice saying them out loud but do not write them out. This will make you sound so natural but reflective!!

Love this!

 

[Bread]

That’s fair enough, but it’s also important to remember that not everyone can afford to spend £100s on perfectly tailored suits, which would of course look a lot more presentable than a regular suit. I don’t think anyone can or should draw a conclusion on someone’s character based on what they are wearing either. That sounds a bit mad in my opinion. It’s a very classist thing to do. I guess that’s the reality of city law though. 🤷🏾‍♂️​

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.

 

[trainee4u]

That’s fair enough, but it’s also important to remember that not everyone can afford to spend £100s on perfectly tailored suits, which would of course look a lot more presentable than a regular suit. I don’t think anyone can or should draw a conclusion on someone’s character based on what they are wearing either. That sounds a bit mad in my opinion. It’s a very classist thing to do. I guess that’s the reality of city law though. 🤷🏾‍♂️​

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.

 

[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.