This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- Can someone give an honest answer?
- Social life at Cambridge Uni - what is it like?
- Can an additional personal statement ever HARM your Cambridge application?
- Smc & bmo
- Ucat
- Female biological sciences imperial students
- st dominics vs william perkin CofE
- St Dominic’s Vs Woodhouse
- AQA GCSE English Language Paper 1
- St dominics
- OCR GCSE Biology A (Gateway) Paper 4 Higher - 06 June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- St Dominic’s Late Application
- Maths as a female student?
- What's the difference between an Oxbridge personal statement and an Imperial ps?
- EPQ title on F1
- Degree Choice for Aspiring Barrister
- ...
- Do Durham discriminate against Oxbridge applicants?
- Michaela or Brampton Manor???
- Electrical installations level 3 OR 2 HELPP
Oxbridge domination
Most people, I think, know that the bar is heavily dominated by Oxbridge graduates, but it seems City law firms are similarly narrow in terms of their employees' almae matres.
According to a contact at a prominent City law firm, approximately half of the trainees in his cohort are graduates of Oxford or Cambridge and at Slaughter and May the figure is around 75%. He also says that, as a non-Oxbridge graduate, you need to have a first or some other stand-out feature to have a realistic chance of obtaining a TC at a top City firm.
I must admit to being surprised by this as, judging by their careers pages, such firms would have you believe that their trainees have more diverse backgrounds.
I don't find their academic elitism objectionable, but I do object to their mendacity on the subject (as regards which universities they predominantly recruit from).
What are other people's thoughts on this?
According to a contact at a prominent City law firm, approximately half of the trainees in his cohort are graduates of Oxford or Cambridge and at Slaughter and May the figure is around 75%. He also says that, as a non-Oxbridge graduate, you need to have a first or some other stand-out feature to have a realistic chance of obtaining a TC at a top City firm.
I must admit to being surprised by this as, judging by their careers pages, such firms would have you believe that their trainees have more diverse backgrounds.
I don't find their academic elitism objectionable, but I do object to their mendacity on the subject (as regards which universities they predominantly recruit from).
What are other people's thoughts on this?
Scroll to see replies
Reply 1
Having done VS at several top City firms, I must say that I was rather surprised by how few Oxbridge applicants there were. I think your friend is exxagerating or trying to play up his own achievements, namely his capacity to 'overcome' the handicap.
As to the Bar--well, no dispute there.
As to the Bar--well, no dispute there.
Reply 2
I've talked to quite a lot of trainees, and yes, some firms take a majority of oxbridge, some are more open to others.
If you have a 2:1 and the rest of what it takes, it won't hold you back if it's what you want.
The bar may be a little harder to break from tradition but they're big on personality too.
If you have a 2:1 and the rest of what it takes, it won't hold you back if it's what you want.
The bar may be a little harder to break from tradition but they're big on personality too.
Evil_Genius
Having done VS at several top City firms, I must say that I was rather surprised by how few Oxbridge applicants there were. I think your friend is exxagerating or trying to play up his own achievements, namely his capacity to 'overcome' the handicap.
As to the Bar--well, no dispute there.
As to the Bar--well, no dispute there.
As somebody who actually spoke to the person in question, I didn't feel that he was being ostentatious nor that he was 'exxagerating'. I pressed him on the issue as I was curious.
cream tends to float to the top of the bottle. i.e., a significant proportion of the best graduates/candidates for law firms are likely to come from oxbridge.
i think it's more a logical coincidence than it is a bias or engineered selection.
if you're from another top university in the country (london, redbrick, russell group etc), a 2.1 really will suffice. i know people who have achieved 2.1s (and even 2.2s) at these universities and received multiple offers of training contracts, and some people with 1sts who just aren't right for the job (i.e. no personal skills, poor commercial awareness).
law firms look for bright, confident, hard working and personable people. a number of these are likely to have gone to oxbridge obviously (especially when ticking the bright and hard working boxes), but the attributes can be demonstrated by students from any institution.
of the vacation schemes i've done, and looking at the future joiner list for my firm, i really don't think there is a bias. maybe there is for one particular firm in the magic circle, but it's not widespread throughout the profession at all.
i think it's more a logical coincidence than it is a bias or engineered selection.
if you're from another top university in the country (london, redbrick, russell group etc), a 2.1 really will suffice. i know people who have achieved 2.1s (and even 2.2s) at these universities and received multiple offers of training contracts, and some people with 1sts who just aren't right for the job (i.e. no personal skills, poor commercial awareness).
law firms look for bright, confident, hard working and personable people. a number of these are likely to have gone to oxbridge obviously (especially when ticking the bright and hard working boxes), but the attributes can be demonstrated by students from any institution.
of the vacation schemes i've done, and looking at the future joiner list for my firm, i really don't think there is a bias. maybe there is for one particular firm in the magic circle, but it's not widespread throughout the profession at all.
Reply 5
I know 10 people at MC firms - 2 have Oxbridge firsts, 1 has an Oxbridge 2.1, 7 have "good" redbrick (UCL, KCL, LSE etc) 2.1s.
Reply 6
Well in these disscussions you often hear peoples opinions and they nearly always conflict, I managed to get my hands on a report of the educational backgrounds of those in the legal proffession, giiving some hard statistics. Heres some relavant infomation (from 2005)
Our findings indicate that access to partnership positions in the ‘magic circle’ law firms has
broadened somewhat over the last 15 years. In 2004, 55 percent of the partners identified were
independently educated – a decline of 13 percent compared with the 1989 figure. The university
background of partners has also changed: in 2004 just 53 percent of the partners had taken their first degrees at Oxford or Cambridge, compared with 65 percent in 1988, and significantly more
now study at one of the other leading legal universities – 26 percent in 2004 compared with 18 percent in 1988.
Our findings show that in both samples over two thirds of barristers at the top commercial
chambers went to fee-paying schools and over 80 percent were educated at Oxford or
Cambridge, while very few went to universities outside the top 12 – just seven percent in 2004.
So this shows over half Magic circle partners went to Oxbridge, and 80% of Commerical Barristers at top chambers came from Oxbridge. However these figures show the educational backgrounds of lawyers that are at the top of their proffessions.
The facts remain however, Oxbridge clearly dominates recruitment in the City. It would seem logical that a 1st is required to enter such prestigious institutions from a non oxbridge university, simply a 2:1 would appear to require a damn exceptional candidiate.
Its clear however that outside Oxbridge the calibre of the uni is imperative. Nana Julia you mentioned Uni's that are boast MC lawyers however the examples you've given are from top London universitys. I wonder the advantage a london uni candidate has over a non-oxbridge non-london candidate (Durham, York, Warwick etc)?
Our findings indicate that access to partnership positions in the ‘magic circle’ law firms has
broadened somewhat over the last 15 years. In 2004, 55 percent of the partners identified were
independently educated – a decline of 13 percent compared with the 1989 figure. The university
background of partners has also changed: in 2004 just 53 percent of the partners had taken their first degrees at Oxford or Cambridge, compared with 65 percent in 1988, and significantly more
now study at one of the other leading legal universities – 26 percent in 2004 compared with 18 percent in 1988.
Our findings show that in both samples over two thirds of barristers at the top commercial
chambers went to fee-paying schools and over 80 percent were educated at Oxford or
Cambridge, while very few went to universities outside the top 12 – just seven percent in 2004.
So this shows over half Magic circle partners went to Oxbridge, and 80% of Commerical Barristers at top chambers came from Oxbridge. However these figures show the educational backgrounds of lawyers that are at the top of their proffessions.
The facts remain however, Oxbridge clearly dominates recruitment in the City. It would seem logical that a 1st is required to enter such prestigious institutions from a non oxbridge university, simply a 2:1 would appear to require a damn exceptional candidiate.
Its clear however that outside Oxbridge the calibre of the uni is imperative. Nana Julia you mentioned Uni's that are boast MC lawyers however the examples you've given are from top London universitys. I wonder the advantage a london uni candidate has over a non-oxbridge non-london candidate (Durham, York, Warwick etc)?
Reply 7
Very curious--too bad the sample is limited to commercial chambers, as the Oxbridge vs. non-Oxbridge situation is very clear there even without stats. It's the regional, common/civil sets that I'd be curious about, as the situation is less stark there. Despite the stats, I'm still going to try and beat the stats at the commercial sets with a Durham LLB. That actually begs the question as to the percentage of those 80% Oxbridge barristers who have first, vs. those the classification within the 20% group.
As to the non-London vs. London, I'd certainly argue (objectively, without regard to my Durham-fondness) that Durham is regarded amongst the Bar at least as favourably as the London unis.
EDITED: to make me sound like less of a knob.
As to the non-London vs. London, I'd certainly argue (objectively, without regard to my Durham-fondness) that Durham is regarded amongst the Bar at least as favourably as the London unis.
EDITED: to make me sound like less of a knob.
the whole needing a first if you haven't been to oxbridge is such a strange myth or fantasy, clearly dreamed up by people who haven't attempted experienced life inside a law firm or life inside a university other than oxbridge.
once you're in an interview, the partners really couldn't give a **** whether you're on for a 2.1 or 1st; they just want to see that you can do the job.
once you're in an interview, the partners really couldn't give a **** whether you're on for a 2.1 or 1st; they just want to see that you can do the job.
I think people need to remember that it is very risky viewing partners as one homogenous construct (with partners from that one firm on the naughty step). Most partners think the job a trainee does is a bit of a joke and paid about twice what's it worth (grain of truth in this: trainees are billed at paralegal rates, but earn almost twice the amount). They're looking much more long-term than the challenges which arise in the trainee contract.
Reply 10
once you're in an interview, the partners really couldn't give a **** whether you're on for a 2.1 or 1st; they just want to see that you can do the job.
Hmmm, this seems very contary to alot of messages given out by good commerical city firms, mostly the messages that I've heard are that academic achievement is heavily (if not in my opininon - too heavily) quoted by candidates and held in very high regard by the recruitment. I've even read in firm requirements, that all qualifications (even those at GCSE level) are considered.
i should probably rephrase. obviously good city firms want applicants with 2.1s and/or 1sts - the latter being even better potentially - but they're not going to fuss too much about why a 2.1 candidate isn't on track for a 1st.
if you haven't got a 2.1 or a 1st they'll obviously be very bothered, but as long as you have either a 2.1 or 1st, whichever one it is (even if you're non-oxbridge) won't be big a deal.
if you haven't got a 2.1 or a 1st they'll obviously be very bothered, but as long as you have either a 2.1 or 1st, whichever one it is (even if you're non-oxbridge) won't be big a deal.
silence
i should probably rephrase. obviously good city firms want applicants with 2.1s and/or 1sts - the latter being even better potentially - but they're not going to fuss too much about why a 2.1 candidate isn't on track for a 1st.
if you haven't got a 2.1 or a 1st they'll obviously be very bothered, but as long as you have either a 2.1 or 1st, whichever one it is (even if you're non-oxbridge) won't be big a deal.
if you haven't got a 2.1 or a 1st they'll obviously be very bothered, but as long as you have either a 2.1 or 1st, whichever one it is (even if you're non-oxbridge) won't be big a deal.
This is a bit misleading. A lot of firms have an internal benchmark, e.g. A&O, they are looking for 64% average from most unis.
Micky13
Is that A&O bench mark definite??
It was what I was told an open day, and most people on my vac scheme were well clear of the target. In fact, as the vac scheme was last year, I know most of my fellow vaccies degree classes [I'm on a four year, so haven't graduated yet]. Out of the 16 people I still speak to, 14 graduated and 10 got 1sts, and there was no evidence of a weaker standard for Oxbridge candidates. At least two of the people I didn't keep in touch with would also be likely to have firsts (as they had them in their Oxford mods, which I gather is rarer).
mr_lawyer
It was what I was told an open day, and most people on my vac scheme were well clear of the target. In fact, as the vac scheme was last year, I know most of my fellow vaccies degree classes [I'm on a four year, so haven't graduated yet]. Out of the 16 people I still speak to, 14 graduated and 10 got 1sts, and there was no evidence of a weaker standard for Oxbridge candidates. At least two of the people I didn't keep in touch with would also be likely to have firsts (as they had them in their Oxford mods, which I gather is rarer).
wait are you saying you need to average 64% in your 1st year modules or your final degree?
mr_lawyer
This is a bit misleading. A lot of firms have an internal benchmark, e.g. A&O, they are looking for 64% average from most unis.
That's interesting, as I secured an interview at A&O having averaged 62% from Cambridge - which implies that they are at least a little more lenient with Oxbridge people. (I didn't get it, incidentally, but that was because I mucked up the interview - nothing to do with my grades.)
Alexander
That's interesting, as I secured an interview at A&O having averaged 62% from Cambridge - which implies that they are at least a little more lenient with Oxbridge people. (I didn't get it, incidentally, but that was because I mucked up the interview - nothing to do with my grades.)
It's not fixed, they're not going to be that absolute - they don't use computer screening software unlike some firms [e.g. Simmons, Ashurst, CMS, Eversheds] . I know someone from UCL with a first year 2:2 average who was interviewed (unsuccessfully). I think, considering how they assess an application (unlike say Links, CC or FF your paper form is still considered after the interview), marginals need to really impress at interview.
mr_lawyer
It's not fixed, they're not going to be that absolute - they don't use computer screening software unlike some firms [e.g. Simmons, Ashurst, CMS, Eversheds] . I know someone from UCL with a first year 2:2 average who was interviewed (unsuccessfully). I think, considering how they assess an application (unlike say Links, CC or FF your paper form is still considered after the interview), marginals need to really impress at interview.
I don't mean to sound belligerent but I'm just genuinely curious: how do you know so much about the internal processes of law firms? This isn't the sort of thing which they generally make public. Incidentally, I heard the contrary from the CMS grad recruitment manager at an open day back in December - she said that all application forms were entirely human-screened.
Anyhow, back to the main point, a quick assessment of the unis from which trainees come will certainly suggest that (no matter what they might say!) law firms don't treat all universities equally, so it seems to make sense that different percentage scores are expected from different universities.
Alexander
I don't mean to sound belligerent but I'm just genuinely curious: how do you know so much about the internal processes of law firms? This isn't the sort of thing which they generally make public. Incidentally, also, I heard the contrary from the CMS grad recruitment manager at an open day back in September - she said that all application forms were entirely human-screened.
Anyhow, back to the main point, a quick assessment of the unis from which trainees come will certainly suggest that (no matter what they might say!) law firms don't treat all universities equally, so it seems to make sense that different percentage scores are expected from different universities.
Anyhow, back to the main point, a quick assessment of the unis from which trainees come will certainly suggest that (no matter what they might say!) law firms don't treat all universities equally, so it seems to make sense that different percentage scores are expected from different universities.
so what range of trainees were there? what was the general university trends? lol
Related discussions
- Can someone give an honest answer?
- Social life at Cambridge Uni - what is it like?
- Can an additional personal statement ever HARM your Cambridge application?
- Smc & bmo
- Ucat
- Female biological sciences imperial students
- st dominics vs william perkin CofE
- St Dominic’s Vs Woodhouse
- AQA GCSE English Language Paper 1
- St dominics
- OCR GCSE Biology A (Gateway) Paper 4 Higher - 06 June 2024 [Exam Chat]
- St Dominic’s Late Application
- Maths as a female student?
- What's the difference between an Oxbridge personal statement and an Imperial ps?
- EPQ title on F1
- Degree Choice for Aspiring Barrister
- ...
- Do Durham discriminate against Oxbridge applicants?
- Michaela or Brampton Manor???
- Electrical installations level 3 OR 2 HELPP
Latest
Trending
Last reply 13 hours ago
CPS Pupillage/Legal Trainee Scheme (Oct 2026) Start!Last reply 1 week ago
Optimum time to start Barrister Training Course (Jan or Sept)?Last reply 1 month ago
Realistic Chances of Solicitor or Barrister - Legal Journey.Last reply 1 month ago
GDL Scholarship from an Inn of Court - Do you need to secure a place first?Last reply 2 months ago
CPS Legal Trainee Scheme 2025 (start October 2026)Last reply 3 months ago
Bar Training Course (BPC, BVS, BPTC) - the best university?
