The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
silence
this is what i don't understand.

many firms urge unsuccessful vac scheme applicants to try for a training contract, but surely by the TC application stage it's just a case of 'let's pick the best vac scheme students'...


Not true. It's not really like banking, where bar a few exceptions, people have one substantive work experience placement. Some people will have a lot of offers after vac schemes, such that, a firm which has 80 summer vac scheme students, will be making offers to 60-70+, but is competing with a large number of firms. Some people had four or five offers on September 1st! This obviously has a downward trickle, as does the random cases of people doing 3 vac schemes and getting no offers, and the odd person deciding to go for another career. The offer rate for vac schemes, unlike training contracts, is very tight. At one MC firm, only 2 people turned down offers of vac schemes this year. The offer rate for training contracts is significantly higher (thank goodness!).

Thus, it makes complete sense, for the industry as a whole to encourage re-application. The main reason is that - one would think - the lack of a prior vac scheme application weakens the candidate's ability to speak of a long-standing interest in the firm etc. Another reason, which I think is also very important, is that people are generally rejected by the law firms for a very similar number of reasons - specifically lack of commercial awareness, awkward interview style etc. After a vac scheme or two, whether the candidate is capable of overcoming these defects should be clear.

A final key reason firms encourage re-applicants is that they know they can miss people. If you rejected someone, but CC and S&M gave them vac schemes, maybe they had greater potential than you saw... and hello, that borderline 2:1/2:2 is now a borderline 1/2:1... interview, interview, interview!!!

Regarding Slaughters, I'm surprised about your experience Laura as Slaughters seem to have a trait of making random offers to people with no significant work experience (either city law or the bar).
I entirely agree with mr_lawyer, vacation schemes are important and a lot of law firms do recruit a substantial amount of their trainees from them. Also as mr_lawyer points out getting on at least one vacation scheme is important for this reason, even if you don't apply for a T.C./aren't successful in getting a training contract with a firm you did a vac sch with.

All in all it also makes it tougher to secure a training contract with any firm if you haven't done a vac sch. Employers are likely to ponder whether you either didn't apply or weren't successful - its a question that will put you on the spot in an interview. Also, when you apply to most city firms with whom you haven't completed a vac sch, they are likely to only have 25%-33% of their places available and so competition hots up even more.

For those that may be interested, I recently posted a piece on my blog offering some personal advice on how to secure a vacation scheme. The advice is based on my own experiences of going through the process and so it should be treated as such. Here's the link - http://theambitiouslawstudent.blogspot.com/2007/10/vacation-placements-part-1-application.html - please feel free to leave comments.
Reply 22
bluedog
All in all it also makes it tougher to secure a training contract with any firm if you haven't done a vac sch. Employers are likely to ponder whether you either didn't apply or weren't successful - its a question that will put you on the spot in an interview.

whilst it's early days, i'm fearing that this will be the case with me!

so far i've already had two rejections (one after interview and one with a firm which doesn't interview) for xmas vac schemes. i've got three more applications pending and am likely to apply for a couple more, but it is a rather tricky time i'm finding!
Reply 23
don't worry silence at least you've managed to get the apps out - freshers' week was so busy for me that im only really starting now and have done a grand total of two so far! :s
Reply 24
bluedog
I entirely agree with mr_lawyer, vacation schemes are important and a lot of law firms do recruit a substantial amount of their trainees from them. Also as mr_lawyer points out getting on at least one vacation scheme is important for this reason, even if you don't apply for a T.C./aren't successful in getting a training contract with a firm you did a vac sch with.

All in all it also makes it tougher to secure a training contract with any firm if you haven't done a vac sch. Employers are likely to ponder whether you either didn't apply or weren't successful - its a question that will put you on the spot in an interview. Also, when you apply to most city firms with whom you haven't completed a vac sch, they are likely to only have 25%-33% of their places available and so competition hots up even more.

For those that may be interested, I recently posted a piece on my blog offering some personal advice on how to secure a vacation scheme. The advice is based on my own experiences of going through the process and so it should be treated as such. Here's the link - http://theambitiouslawstudent.blogspot.com/2007/10/vacation-placements-part-1-application.html - please feel free to leave comments.



The advice you give is very good, but I think you might be over-exagerrating the competition at MC firms. The most competitive firms, in my opinion, are the ones such as Olswang, Kendall Freeman and Cleary, which offer the benefits of top level work and training without the drawbacks of large intakes.

At all of the MC firms I interviewed with, I was asked very basic questions about my motivation for wanting to be a lawyer. At one firm, my justification was purely 'tangible career benefits'. I think the only MC firm which seeks very well reasoned views as to why you want them is Links, and they put all of the stuff on their (very comprehensive) website.

I thought you might like to have some hypothetical examples of people I have met, either at uni or vac schemes, and how they've done:

(A) Candidate A achieved the highest marks in her year group at a leading university, with an astonishing 75% in Contract. Her score for Land Law, somewhat shockingly was a low 2:i. In addition to her studies, she held a Law Society position, was on MUN, volunteered with Amnesty and a charity for refugees, had completed a ten-week internship at the UN. In her spare time she enjoys writing (having published two short stories), music and languages (she is fluent in English, French, Spanish, Cantonese and Mandarin).

She was rejected after interview by one MC firm (offered a place at the other two she applied to); offered places at three leading US firms without interview (Vac Scheme success). Her personal tutor secured her two mini-pupillages at leading chambers, and she has decided to undertake a Masters degree before committing to a firm choice. One firm was prepared to offer her a sign-on bonus commiting her to that firm, if she chose to become a solicitor.

(B) Candidate B achieved weak first year marks, averaging 51% at a red brick University. He had considerable prior work experience, much of it due to his education at a leading (though not perceived as 'upper class') Public School. He had also spent time working with a leading (Tory - of course :p: ) MP. In his second year, he held a position on the student Law society, which offered scope to liase with law firm professionals. He applied for twenty vacation placements, obtaining two at firms which are in the top 30 by revenue. He was interviewed by one MC firm - the same one which rejected Candidate A - and also rejected. When he enquired why, he was told that his answer to the case-study section were not well formed, and he was 'too aggressive' at times.

He worked hard during his second year, and improved his marks to an average of a low 2:1, although he did achieve a 2:2 in Jurisprudence and Trusts. He enjoyed both his vacation schemes, and was made offers by both of the firms. He was this time rejected outright by the MC firm which had interviewed him before, but delighted to receive an offer from an MC firm which he duly accepted.

(C) Candidate C attends Oxbridge, and has scored firsts in all his exams - both university and college ones - to date. Indeed, one of his examination scores was technically a 'starred first'. He passionately enjoys studying law, but enjoys relaxing by playing the piano, painting and attending concerts (chamber music). His only extracurricular involvement at university has been on the college ball committtee.
He was interviewed by the four MC firms which interview for vac schemes, and offered vac scheme places by two of them (notwithstanding the fact that his first year results were in the top 20 in his year for Law). He chose to only undertake a placement with one of these firm, and also spent time with a US firm and two 'Silver Circle' firms.
In September, he received offers from all of these firms and another Magic Circle firm (easy to work out which!). He chose, after careful deliberation, to accept the MC firm he had completed a vacation placement with.

(D) Candidate D studies Law in London, after completing an undergrad degree in Mathematics at a leading US university and working for Merill Lynch for three years. She achieves a mixture of 2:1s and 2:2s in her first year, and receives no vacation placement offers. In her second year exams, she achieves 2:1s, and a first in Criminal Law. Her extracurricular activities are her passion: she writes a lively weblog (she'd kill me for disclosing it), and plays for the university in two prominent sports. She also enjoys theatre, and has written a play which will be staged at the university later this year.

Slightly disheartened, she is unsure of whether to apply for a training contract. Her tutor advises her to ring a firm and speak through her issues, as he cannot understand how someone who was offered an Associate position at Merill is not getting offers! This firm, without requesting an application form, schedules her in for an interview. A week later she is offered a training contract, which she duly accepts.

(E) Candidate E studies Law with an Erasmus year. His first year results average 59% with - frustratingly - a 56% in Olbigations/Contract. He only secures a vac scheme with McGrigors in his second year, which is disappointing as he really wants to work for an MC firm. In his second year, he cuts his socialising to the weekends, joins the university orchestra and is elected treasurer of a cultural society at university. His second year results improve markedly - two firsts and three 2:1s, with an average of 67%.
He interviews the following year at three MC firms, and is offered a placement at one of them, plus a place at another top 5 firm (again, easy to work out which!).
He is offered training contracts with both at the end of the summer.

Key tips for MC success

There are limited ways of showing a particular dedication to Magic Circle firms, but people I know who had - i.e. Herbert Smith Campus Manager, open days (A&O, Slaughters, Freshfields), workshops (Clifford Chance), the Challenge (Eversheds) have been very successful in getting interviews and converting those interviews into offers.


Be clear about what they want. Linklaters want an ode as to why they are the best, Clifford Chance are similar. Comparatively, Freshfields and A&O test this much more through the vacation scheme itself.


Don't be defeatist, at all. The above candidates all demonstrate that MC success cannot be defined by one factor.


It is still only October, there is more than enough time to take up a new interest for vac scheme application purposes.


Before you apply, have an idea of the order in which you rank firms. Not your friends, or your tutors: you. If you don't, it is likely you could be following the herd.

^That's a really great post mr_lawyer.

When you say that Candidate D contacted a firm and one of them invited her for an interview without any need for an application form, was it as spontaneous as it sounds or was there some other important factor? Also, did she give some sort of personal statement over the phone in order to engage the interest of the firm?

For Candidate B - did they have mostly 2.ii marks at the time of applying for a vac sch/T.C? If so, was it their extra-curricular activities and previous experience that secured them a place, do you think?

I like your tips for MC success. In particular, the point that you make about demonstrating some personal interest in a firm, is absolutely true at my university. I know of at least two students who don't have especially good grades academically that have been successful in getting on Vacation schemes and then receive an offer of a training contract because, for example, they have been a campus-manager or attended workshops etc. On a personal level, thats one area where I am lacking and I will keep an eye out for campus positions and other events this year. Thanks!
Reply 26
i've got three campus workshop/presentation/dinner events lined up this week - have never been an anything like it before so will see how it goes.

re: academic marks, i've got no idea on how good mine are relative to everyone else. the last two years sees marks ranging from 54 to 76 (two 2:2s, six 2:1s and three 1s). i'd like to think that any hesitations based on the 2:2s are outweighed by being impressed with the higher marks. no idea though, as the two firms which i've been rejected from so far won't give feedback.
Reply 27
bluedog
^That's a really great post mr_lawyer.

When you say that Candidate D contacted a firm and one of them invited her for an interview without any need for an application form, was it as spontaneous as it sounds or was there some other important factor? Also, did she give some sort of personal statement over the phone in order to engage the interest of the firm?

For Candidate B - did they have mostly 2.ii marks at the time of applying for a vac sch/T.C? If so, was it their extra-curricular activities and previous experience that secured them a place, do you think?

I like your tips for MC success. In particular, the point that you make about demonstrating some personal interest in a firm, is absolutely true at my university. I know of at least two students who don't have especially good grades academically that have been successful in getting on Vacation schemes and then receive an offer of a training contract because, for example, they have been a campus-manager or attended workshops etc. On a personal level, thats one area where I am lacking and I will keep an eye out for campus positions and other events this year. Thanks!


Candidate D does have an excellent (and well connected) personal tutor, so I wouldn't be surprised if he'd contacted them first. The firm she had applied to had already got a copy of her vac scheme form, so that is also significant I guess.

Candidate B yes - applying for vac schemes, all the marks were 2:1s (none higher than 54). I think that the most crucial aspect to his application was his tenacity; he had to face fairly brutal questioning in all his interviews, hence the aggressive feedback earlier on!

I guess my overall view of MC firms is they want people who are consistently very good/excellent but then have one thing that is truly outstanding. Some people do have more, but I don't think it is necessary.

The other thing I've forgotten to mention is that if you can show recurrent themes in your activities; e.g. I did Young Enterprise, Target 2.0, London Business Challenge, AEISEC - they're all good, but having done them together creates a whole greater than the sum of the parts.

And - final advice - use simple sentences in application forms. It is not the place for elaborate writing!

Good luck!
Reply 28
silence
i've got three campus workshop/presentation/dinner events lined up this week - have never been an anything like it before so will see how it goes.

re: academic marks, i've got no idea on how good mine are relative to everyone else. the last two years sees marks ranging from 54 to 76 (two 2:2s, six 2:1s and three 1s). i'd like to think that any hesitations based on the 2:2s are outweighed by being impressed with the higher marks. no idea though, as the two firms which i've been rejected from so far won't give feedback.


I think it matters much less as a non-law student - indeed, it is only relatively recently that firms started getting non-law candidates to put down all their subject marks (and I personally agree with the view that it is not fair to scrutinise non-law students on first year marks because they are not in a position to know {NB the obsession with first year marks is almost solely a legal careers thing!}). Anyway, based on my vac schemes I'd definitely say your marks would be no barrier.

It is normally easiest to get feedback by ringing. I know A&O refuse email requests, but they gave very, very, helpful advice to two of my friends (one of whom is a Candidate in the above post).
As we're talking general MC here I'll add my 2 cents as I have a TC with an MC firm. Mr Lawyer's advice has been great, and I'd agree with all of it. Additionally, I think it's important to be able to differentiate between the firms. They all do big deals, you'll get great quality work/training at each etc, and you really do need an answer to why you want to go to FF over A&O, for example. Furthermore: be commercially aware!! This was a substantial element of my TC interview. Look at what's in the news: the latest deals as well as general themes. For example, if private equity's in the news know what the hell it is. Be able to explain how they work, who invests in them, why they're controversial and give examples of such firms: KKR, 3i and JC Flowers etc and deals they've done, e.g. the AA.
I'm a third year History student with no Law experience but with the intention of doing the GDL next year. Do you think I'd be able to get a vac scheme this coming summer with my background? Any response would be greatly appreciated.
Reply 31
paulsch: some firms run vac schemes specifically for final year non-law students, whilst some accept non-law students on their main schemes (i think), and some run open days.

you need to start researching firms and applying to their vacation schemes now, as for some of them the deadline is as early as the end of this month.
Reply 32
bluedog

All in all it also makes it tougher to secure a training contract with any firm if you haven't done a vac sch.


I'm sure with some firms this could be true. But I'd be careful before suggesting it was a pre-requisite of TC success.

A few people around here know someone who was interviewed by a top MC firm without a hint of a Vac Scheme anywhere near their CV. Nor did they have a single piece of relevant Work Experience at all.

It was raised in the Interview and the partner said that Vac Schemes are for the student's benefit - to see what life in the firm is like and to see if Law is for them.

(Note: One colloquial story, one firm, one partner = not gospel. But damn interesting.)

In my opinion it therefore should not be viewed as an attempt to wear suits that you can't afford and to trot about attempting to impress everyone from the Senior Partner to the cleaning lady... And then clutching onto it desperately throughout your Application and Interview process expecting Willy Wonka and a golden ticket to fall into your lap at any second...

If you're an excellent candidate I personally don't see why they'd hold the omission of a VS against you.

Just justify why you didn't fancy spending your summer cooped up in an office with a load of pretentious 19 year olds spouting off their Contract Law book to anyone who'll listen, and taking a "G'morning" from the girl on security or a "You're welcome" from the guy in the Canteen as some covert signal that they are to be instantaneously recruited... :rolleyes:
Vac Schemes are for the student's benefit but they also are a good way for a firm to determine whether you would be successful with them as a trainee. They are a good way of testing a student's interest levels in the law and in the particular firm.

The way that I know I am right is because our Prime Minister has decided to do some work experience and let the country get to know him before he publicly seeks a mandate. Aren't we rewarding him for his success in that period?! :smile:
Reply 34
Dreama
I'm sure with some firms this could be true. But I'd be careful before suggesting it was a pre-requisite of TC success.

A few people around here know someone who was interviewed by a top MC firm without a hint of a Vac Scheme anywhere near their CV. Nor did they have a single piece of relevant Work Experience at all.

It was raised in the Interview and the partner said that Vac Schemes are for the student's benefit - to see what life in the firm is like and to see if Law is for them.

(Note: One colloquial story, one firm, one partner = not gospel. But damn interesting.)

In my opinion it therefore should not be viewed as an attempt to wear suits that you can't afford and to trot about attempting to impress everyone from the Senior Partner to the cleaning lady... And then clutching onto it desperately throughout your Application and Interview process expecting Willy Wonka and a golden ticket to fall into your lap at any second...

If you're an excellent candidate I personally don't see why they'd hold the omission of a VS against you.

Just justify why you didn't fancy spending your summer cooped up in an office with a load of pretentious 19 year olds spouting off their Contract Law book to anyone who'll listen, and taking a "G'morning" from the girl on security or a "You're welcome" from the guy in the Canteen as some covert signal that they are to be instantaneously recruited... :rolleyes:



Ha ha ha ... I think Slaughters is the only law firm prepared to admit the schemes are of limited value - either for us (there is a lot we can't see / do) or them (they can't see us doing those tasks). But what a vac scheme does do is demonstrate that you've actually made an effort (successfully) to find out about a legal career. I guess as well, if you're an "excellent" candidate, particularly studying Law, you really would have got something sorted in your second year at uni. I mean, I can see how as a non-law candidate, you might not.

And most people on the schemes aren't pretentious. In fact, I thought my MC ones were much nicer, as everyone did kind of know they had a job unless they mucked it up. For true pretension try doing the very much in vogue 'group mini-pupillages'. I did two and fear that they've really damaged my ability to consider the bar a sane career choice!
Reply 35
Ahem... I didn't say it was Slaughters.... :p:

Still.. It was most definitely emphasised that a VS is of no particular professional advantage -- only a personal one.
Reply 36
You should also realise that vac schemes act as an excellent indicator to other firms of your potential ability when it comes to recruiting for trainees.

Rather than simply indicating that you've made an effort to enquire about the profession, it shows a firm that you were good enough for one of their competitors. In some ways, firms regard the presence of a VS on an application form as having done some of their filtering process for them: "Well, if Jonny did a vac scheme with Herbert Smith he must have something going for him. Lets interview him..."
Reply 37
chalks
You should also realise that vac schemes act as an excellent indicator to other firms of your potential ability when it comes to recruiting for trainees.

Rather than simply indicating that you've made an effort to enquire about the profession, it shows a firm that you were good enough for one of their competitors. In some ways, firms regard the presence of a VS on an application form as having done some of their filtering process for them: "Well, if Jonny did a vac scheme with Herbert Smith he must have something going for him. Lets interview him..."



Yes, this is such a crucial point. One of my friends graduated with a 2:2, and although the firm she had a training contract with let her go, it was the vac schemes which helped secure her another (and ironically better!) training contract.
Reply 38
Dreama
Ahem... I didn't say it was Slaughters.... :p:

Still.. It was most definitely emphasised that a VS is of no particular professional advantage -- only a personal one.


Even with Slaughters, however, there are people - Lawyer Laura on here for example - who have been rejected for a lack of evidence supporting for decision to pursue a career in commercial law. Vac schemes, for all their many, many, many flaws (the naff champagne... the case study ... the sleazy trainees ... the sleazy vac schemers... people screaming 'tab', or singing 'I'd rather go to Oxford than St John's... and so on) are the best way of doing this.
Reply 39
I think you'll find that the chance to be a sleazy trainee around vac scheme time is one of the few perks of joining a City law firm...

Latest