TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[legallybrunette8]

Hi @legallybrunette8 the word count limit for this question is quite low considering the amount of material you have to cover, so you will have to be very concise and efficient with your writing. I can see two approaches working here:

1. You split the answer in two sections - one dealing with the "why have you chosen to be a solicitor" part and one dealing with the "what relevant skills do you possess part", where each is around 100 words in length. The advantage here is that your writing will be more structured and clear, although somewhat more modular.
2. You have one integrated answer that addresses both the interest in law part and the relevant skills part. The advantage is that this makes for a nicer and more integrated reading experience; the disadvantage is that you will have to be more careful to ensure your writing is very clear so that the recruiter can easily see both questions are addressed even without specific sections.

Regardless of the option you pick, I think you should discuss at least two skills (since the question makes use of the plural rather than singular) but no more than three (simply because of the word count restriction). Of course, each skill will have to be illustrated with an example of an experience, but you will have to describe the experience in less detail than you normally would. Instead of a full STAR structure approach, I think you should aim to describe each experience in one-two short sentences which encapsulate the essence of your tasks and responsibilities (i.e. the 'action' part of STAR, what you actually did) and the relevant results.

Hi Andrei, thanks for the answer! I have another question, although unrelated.

I plan to start mentioning open days in the work experience section (which I surprisingly haven't been doing in my previous applications). I have attended about 10 open days so far from a range of firms, with a mix of open days that have a selective application process, and some which simply require a registration form.

I was wondering if I should mix my first year open days, selective open days, and just normal open days into 1 big group? Or should I seperate them?
And when doing so, how much detail should I go into the open days given the word count?

And lastly, should I also be mentioning virtual work experiences in a different section too? Or would I only mention them if they're relevant to the firm I'm applying to

 

[Andrei Radu]

Hi Andrei, thanks for the answer! I have another question, although unrelated.

I plan to start mentioning open days in the work experience section (which I surprisingly haven't been doing in my previous applications). I have attended about 10 open days so far from a range of firms, with a mix of open days that have a selective application process, and some which simply require a registration form.

I was wondering if I should mix my first year open days, selective open days, and just normal open days into 1 big group? Or should I seperate them?
And when doing so, how much detail should I go into the open days given the word count?

And lastly, should I also be mentioning virtual work experiences in a different section too? Or would I only mention them if they're relevant to the firm I'm applying to

I do not think you should necessarily separate them in categories; recruiters are aware a substantial proportion of open days are selective, and as such will likely infer that several of yours are as well. Nonetheless, there is no harm in separating them in two broad "non-selective careers events" and "selective careers events" groups either. You should simply choose what you think makes more sense in the context of your answer.

As for the second question about the level of detail to go into: you likely will not have sufficient space (and nor would it be appropriate) to describe in detail what happened in each open day and what you learnt. I would either (a) simply list the events and, next to each bullet point on the list, have a short one sentence line with a key takeaway about what I learned; or (b) after listing the open days, go for a more narrative style approach, and have a bigger paragraph explaining how going to these events shaped your interest in commercial law and particular practice areas (and even potentially your interest in the particular firm you are applying for).

For the third question: I think you should always be listing your Forage virtual experiences as well, as they are proof of interest in commercial law and of actual engagement with trainee tasks.

 

[applicant457]

Jones Day spring scheme VI ! Any insights massively appreciated

 

[Legallywhatever]

Hi,

Does anyone know what the Osborne Clarke vac scheme Qs are for this cycle?

 

[chiichii]

A pleasant surprise today, just checked my spam folder in my email and realised BCLP sent an invite for their open day 2 days ago! Ahhhhh

 

[chiichii]

Unfortunately such specific information is not usually available in the public domain. The only sources I found it on were Law.com and The Lawyer, and both are only accessible with an organisational subscription - you should check if your university has one if you are a student.

Hi Andrei, that's really helpful! I know this is not my question but I would like to know how is this information and statistics ( revenue per lawyer, department headcount, etc) helpful for application? Or how can i link these information to me personally if I want to use these stats?

 

[baj5]

given that some firms like freshfields only ask for work experience now, what is the best way to do the section to ensure it is hitting the points they need?

 

[Andrei Radu]

1. Hi Andrei, that's really helpful! I know this is not my question but I would like to know how is this information and statistics ( revenue per lawyer, department headcount, etc) helpful for application? Or how can i link these information to me personally if I want to use these stats?

This type of information can be useful for a variety of purposes in terms of assessing a firm's general business prospects, the quality of its practice and work, and the kind of work and responsibilities you may have at the firm.

To take revenue per lawyer (RPL) firstly: this is seen by Law.com (a leading legal press outlet) as the strongest indicator of a firm's financial health, as it cannot be "gamed" to the same extent as other metrics such as PEP (where firms can restrict equity ranks to boost the headline figure). The reason is that that seeing how much a firm's lawyer generates in income is an indicator of both:

• How in demand the firm is in terms of the number of mandates it works on: to have a high RPL, almost all of the firm's lawyers will have to be kept reasonably busy throughout the year (as the lawyers that are not busy do not generate significant income and thus bring down the average RPL).
• How in demand the firm is in terms of the quality of mandates it works on: to have a high RPL, a firm needs to bill clients high fees for the time their lawyers work on a matter. While RPL can be boosted by keeping lawyers very busy on a high-volume approach, as suggested above, there is a limit to this: at the high-end of commercial law, targets for billable hours converge around 2000 per year. While at some firms (such as Kirkland & Ellis) partners are known to ask associates to go beyond this and hit 2100-2300 at times, it is very rare for people to go beyond this, simply because there is a limit as to how much one can work in a year without burning out. Thus, there is a limit as to how much RPL can be boosted by increasing workload, and this is where the second factor of the equation - billing rates - comes into play (you can helpfully think of RPL as equaling average time spent billing in a year times the billing rates). The more prestigious a firm is, and the more in demand its practitioners, the higher will the firm be able to bill its clients. Normally, clients will only accept the high fees asked by firms like Davis Polk on high-value and highly-complex matters where their expertise is necessary; which means that a high RPL is indicative of a high-quality of mandates you may get to work on.

For department headcount, I would say the main points of relevance are

1. To see how the firm positions itself in the market - i.e. is it more of a boutique or a big shop in that practice area specifically (rather than in general as a firm);
2. To see how much in focus a practice area is in a firm (this is where you would look at comparative headcount between departments); and
3. To see if a firm punches above/bellow its "weight class": if a firm has comparatively fewer people in a department but still achieves the same rankings and works on the same types of matters as larger rivals, it is an indicator of a higher quality/more efficient practice in that it achieves the same results with a lower input. Furthermore, it is arguably indicative of a higher-quality of practitioners, as lawyers at this smaller department will need to juggle the responsibilities normally shared by many more people at a larger shop.

 

[floral.tcla]

I cant believe it, I’ve got an email with an invitation to A&O Shearman’s AC for the WVS!! Best of luck to anyone who hasn’t heard back and I’d really appreciate any advice for case studies, scenario based interviews and esp A&O Shearman’s AC as I’ve heard it’s very hard🥺

 

[jojo23]

Does anybody else find the wait after submitting an application agonising 😭

 

[chiichii]

This type of information can be useful for a variety of purposes in terms of assessing a firm's general business prospects, the quality of its practice and work, and the kind of work and responsibilities you may have at the firm.

To take revenue per lawyer (RPL) firstly: this is seen by Law.com (a leading legal press outlet) as the strongest indicator of a firm's financial health, as it cannot be "gamed" to the same extent as other metrics such as PEP (where firms can restrict equity ranks to boost the headline figure). The reason is that that seeing how much a firm's lawyer generates in income is an indicator of both:

• How in demand the firm is in terms of the number of mandates it works on: to have a high RPL, almost all of the firm's lawyers will have to be kept reasonably busy throughout the year (as the lawyers that are not busy do not generate significant income and thus bring down the average RPL).
• How in demand the firm is in terms of the quality of mandates it works on: to have a high RPL, a firm needs to bill clients high fees for the time their lawyers work on a matter. While RPL can be boosted by keeping lawyers very busy on a high-volume approach, as suggested above, there is a limit to this: at the high-end of commercial law, targets for billable hours converge around 2000 per year. While at some firms (such as Kirkland & Ellis) partners are known to ask associates to go beyond this and hit 2100-2300 at times, it is very rare for people to go beyond this, simply because there is a limit as to how much one can work in a year without burning out. Thus, there is a limit as to how much RPL can be boosted by increasing workload, and this is where the second factor of the equation - billing rates - comes into play (you can helpfully think of RPL as equaling average time spent billing in a year times the billing rates). The more prestigious a firm is, and the more in demand its practitioners, the higher will the firm be able to bill its clients. Normally, clients will only accept the high fees asked by firms like Davis Polk on high-value and highly-complex matters where their expertise is necessary; which means that a high RPL is indicative of a high-quality of mandates you may get to work on.

For department headcount, I would say the main points of relevance are

1. To see how the firm positions itself in the market - i.e. is it more of a boutique or a big shop in that practice area specifically (rather than in general as a firm);
2. To see how much in focus a practice area is in a firm (this is where you would look at comparative headcount between departments); and
3. To see if a firm punches above/bellow its "weight class": if a firm has comparatively fewer people in a department but still achieves the same rankings and works on the same types of matters as larger rivals, it is an indicator of a higher quality/more efficient practice in that it achieves the same results with a lower input. Furthermore, it is arguably indicative of a higher-quality of practitioners, as lawyers at this smaller department will need to juggle the responsibilities normally shared by many more people at a larger shop.

I see! Thanks for your explanation, that's really helpful! I never really look from this angle before. Could you also share some other similar examples that would help me to assess a firm's business prospects and it's quality of practice? Anything I can look up to besides than RPL and department headcount?

 

[johnsmith]

Hi everyone,

With the qualifier "Is this law-related work experience?", do we feel this only covers experience specifically within a law firm? I'm a career changer, and have client-side legal experience from dealing with matters, and have also worked in legal recruitment.

In addition, where do people mention Forage? I'm currently in a job and didn't really feel it fits under "work experience", but often there is no logical space to add it, unless it specifically asks if you completed one of our Forage tasks.

Thanks!

 

[msclm]

Jones Day spring scheme VI ! Any insights massively appreciated

i have mine for the WVS in a few weeks, I’ll lyk how it goes!

 

[Maddy]

Hi, does anyone know what 70% on hold for Linklaters means, and has anyone progressed from 70%?

 

[jojo23]

Anybody heard back from Reed smith, Bird & Bird or HL lift off post application?

 

[BillSikes]

Hi everyone,

With the qualifier "Is this law-related work experience?", do we feel this only covers experience specifically within a law firm? I'm a career changer, and have client-side legal experience from dealing with matters, and have also worked in legal recruitment.

In addition, where do people mention Forage? I'm currently in a job and didn't really feel it fits under "work experience", but often there is no logical space to add it, unless it specifically asks if you completed one of our Forage tasks.

Thanks!

I know Forage is not proper work experience and that you would be hesitant to add it to the work experience section - but if the Forage Work Exp was a programme made by that firm, I would certainly include it in the work exp section (if there is nowhere more appropriate). After all, the reason we have done it is to show interest in that firm!

 

[floral.tcla]

any advice for technical case studies?

 

[berocca567]

Hi, does anyone know what 70% on hold for Linklaters means, and has anyone progressed from 70%?

I have 70% too, and I presume it just means you've done the application & tests, and now it's with them to look at

 

[c.t.tc]

Anybody heard back from Reed smith, Bird & Bird or HL lift off post application?

I got a WG invite from Bird & Bird on the 26th

 

[aspringlawyer25]

I cant believe it, I’ve got an email with an invitation to A&O Shearman’s AC for the WVS!! Best of luck to anyone who hasn’t heard back and I’d really appreciate any advice for case studies, scenario based interviews and esp A&O Shearman’s AC as I’ve heard it’s very hard🥺

Congratulations! can I ask when you applied?