TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2023-24

[yxngd2x]

While I agree with your point about the moral and cultural imperative for greater diversity, the facts are different from my point of view.

For me personally, diversity is not just about white, black, Asian etc.

Why does a white eton educated Oxbridge graduate have more chances of getting a tc in comparison to a white working class non Oxbridge graduate?

Why does a black eton educated Oxbridge graduate have more chances of getting a tc in comparison to a black working class non Oxbridge graduate?

Yes, I agree about the institutional dominance. But I think saying that BAME, working class, and disabled candidates are at large at ACs it’s a stretch. Maybe that’s your experience, but mine has been different.

I have nothing against Oxbridge, but I despise elitism. A candidate should be evaluated taking every factor into account. From my point of view, a non Oxbridge working class person (whether ethnic minority or not) working part time during university and not being spoon fed cause of rich parents has more potential.

Moreover, how does a 19 years olds candidate from Oxbridge with nothing on his CV show a passion for a career in law? Firms are always crying about “passion for commercial law”, then how someone with no tangible passion for law in the CV showed up at the AC at a particular us law firm?

I feel like it’s already been said here and I agree that class is important to look at but the amount of money you have still doesn’t change the colour of your skin at the end of the day — people can’t tell your background just by looking at you so being eton educated and going to Oxbridge doesn’t stop you from being racially discriminated in the same way a non-Oxbridge eton-educated person would if that makes sense

 

[Jessica Booker]

People seem to forget that Oxbridge is difficult and very intense — people achieving top marks there are likely to be hard-working, intelligent, or both. As far as work experience is concerned, due to the intensity of the courses there students are heavily discouraged from seeking paid work during term time (it’s a uni policy), so it’s unsurprising that Oxbridge candidates have less on their CV.
This is not to say that other unis aren’t as good and that people haven’t worked hard to get where they are, just that in the eyes of an employer Oxbridge provides some form of guarantee. Also, lots of partners likely went to Oxbridge, and alumni networks are helpful in this world. But all candidates have to go through the same process, and unis are just a small part of it!
Keep going at it and don’t worry too much about Oxbridge applicants, plenty of people from other unis make it through!

Oxbridge doesn’t provide any guarantees.

Oxbridge applicants were typically the highest rejected groups in terms of numbers, whilst also being the highest number of trainees I hired at a MC firm.

 

[AnonKn635]

It’s easy to achieve top marks when you attend private school and are groomed for academic excellence from a young age. Oxbridge students overwhelmingly come from this background.

This isnt true unfortunately (I am BAME and went to a state school). Almost all of us struggle in some way at Oxbridge, it is just about how much you show it lol. Achieving top marks at Oxbridge is undoubtedly difficult regardless of your background

 

[flower]

It’s easy to achieve top marks when you attend private school and are groomed for academic excellence from a young age. Oxbridge students overwhelmingly come from this background.

I think there’s a perception that most Oxbridge students are somehow sleepwalking into academic success. I can only speak from my experience as a Cambridge undergrad, but I will say that this perception hardly translates to reality: 8 week terms; no reading week and very small classes means term time at Cambridge can be very intense. I know people who went to high-flying private schools, but still struggle to keep up here, so I don’t think it’s necessarily “easy” regardless of one’s background. It’s definitely worse for state school students like myself, but the bottom line is that a lot of people here work hard, including those from extremely privileged backgrounds (and there are some people here ofc who don’t but even those people have seen their fair share of hard work at A-level/GCSE stage, for example).

I still don’t think that this means Oxbridge grads should have a leg up in the recruitment process tho as getting into Oxbridge in and of itself is a highly competitive process, so people shouldn’t be disadvantaged off the basis of not attending.

 

[law2022x]

Not overwhelmingly, but it is a disproportionate amount.

Only about 28-30% of UK Oxbridge students have been privately educated, but this is over four times the national average.

It was 40% for Oxford in 2018 and 38% in 2019 so many current graduates or trainees were privately educated. And the state school statistics famously do not separate grammar schools and comprehensives. But having gone to Oxford, I know first hand there were not many comprehensive school students.

 

[yxngd2x]

I think there’s a perception that most Oxbridge students are somehow sleepwalking into academic success. I can only speak from my experience as a Cambridge undergrad, but I will say that this perception hardly translates to reality: 8 week terms; no reading week and very small classes means term times at Cambridge can be very intense. I know people who went to high-flying private schools, but still struggle to keep up here, so I don’t think it’s necessarily “easy” regardless of one’s background. It’s definitely worse for state school students like myself, but the bottom line is that a lot of people here work hard, including those from extremely privileged backgrounds (and there are some people here ofc who don’t but even those people have seen their fair share of hard work at A-level/GCSE stage, for example).

I still don’t do think that this means Oxbridge grads should have a leg up in the recruitment process tho as getting into Oxbridge in and of itself is a highly competitive process, so people shouldn’t be disadvantaged off the basis of not attending.

Bro idk if I’m waffling or not because I’m not even at Oxbridge🤣but I would even guess because you tend to be more spoonfed at private schools they might even struggle more than the state school students or is it just a mix?

 

[Jessica Booker]

I really don't think the argument that people who go to Oxbridge work harder than others because Oxbridge is difficult and intense is a fair one. People are plenty hard working and intelligent wherever they go. It's not justifiable to say (or imply) that Oxbridge people are more intelligent than anyone who doesn't go there.

This is the problem with this debate - we start to create binary definitions of things being “easy vs difficult” when actually how we define something as being easy or difficult is never discussed.

For instance, the intellectual level could possibly be higher and some will argue this makes it more difficult. However, Oxbridge students undoubedtly have the best support system in the U.K. education system thanks smaller class sizes, the college system, and typically seminars which can often be effectively near enough 1-2-1 level of education.

They are also learning from the world’s leading academics and often with much better infrastructure like access to books journals, and also alumni.

Does this make it easier for them to study to this level when compared to someone whose university is on the verge of bankruptcy and relies on interim staff teaching seminars and lectures to over 450 students? I suspect so anyway!

 

[Jessica Booker]

It was 40% for Oxford in 2018 and 38% in 2019 so many current graduates or trainees were privately educated. And the state school statistics famously do not separate grammar schools and comprehensives. But having gone to Oxford, I know first hand there were not many comprehensive school students.

The stats I was using was 28% Cambridge in 2023 and just over 30% for Oxford the same year.

 

[brieflybrilliant]

even on last year forum, I feel like I remember there being this huge debate on diversity & inclusion and how much law firms consider it and oxbridge grads and them in the picture, etc yada yada

at the end of the day, this process is difficult as it is, we know how the legal industry is, we are aware of the unfair advantages some people can have regardless of oxbridge or having connections or whatever it may be, we know that the legal industry is trying to move towards diversifying in the bigger picture and its been mentioned before, its never going to be a resolved problem.

its always going to be an ongoing topic that will be addressed time and time again. u have to keep at it in this process and see how you can sell yourself when you get to those final stages. thinking about ur competitors being oxbridge or what they have had that you haven't had and putting them up for debate is pointless because it'll be a cyclical argument we'll be stuck in.

do ur best regardless and even if u think 'yeah but im X,Y,Z and I havent had these opps that other people have had', the brutal truth is, it'll honestly jus be a repetitive and destructive cycle and a way of thinking that no-one can help with, jus think about the experiences you do have and try and maximise that out. we cant change the recruitment process or how candidates are judged so the only thing we can worry about is how we jus sell ourselves at this point

everyone works hard, yes sometimes we might not be as polished compared to others who may have been guided to be but this process isn't easy and u jus need one firm to recognise ur potential and worth (which they 1000% will)

[from a BAME, fellow non oxbridge]

 

[law2022x]

This isnt true unfortunately (I am BAME and went to a state school). Almost all of us struggle in some way at Oxbridge, it is just about how much you show it lol. Achieving top marks at Oxbridge is undoubtedly difficult regardless of your background

I am the same but as we both know the stats show that privately educated students are more likely to achieve firsts in first year than state educated. And given most apply for vac schemes in second year, those are the only grades firms can rely on. Plus it is just more difficult as a state educated student because you might struggle to afford vac accommodation or can’t afford a tutor. Several people I know had a tutor for finals. The stats do become more equal in final year but yeah top marks in first year are affected by your background. Especially law students who sit their exams in second term.

 

[OB1465]

I go to Oxford and have only got through to one AC, with several friends of mine being rejected from every firm after application stage. I think this is largely down to a lack of work experience. At Oxford you are not allowed to work during term time due to the workload and, since we have exams at the start of every term, finding time for legal work experience is difficult. The tutors also prepare their students mostly for academia so you are not encouraged to look into careers at an early stage. Not to mention that balancing applications with uni is insanely difficult eg. doing three essays a week, whilst writing applications/doing tests/ prepping for interviews etc.

So the oxbridge name certainly isn’t a guarantee for getting vac schemes/ TCs though I do agree that the tutorial system/ having things in common with oxbridge educated interviewers definitely helps at AC stage. I also think it’s crucial not to undermine the extent to which Oxbridge takes into account your social background in the application process (though this isn’t perfect by any means). There are many state-educated, BAME, and generally under-represented students at Oxbridge who got in of their own merit so I think it’s unfair to lump all oxbridge students together when being at oxbridge is not always down to privilege!

I completely understand the frustration but just because a firm has a high oxbridge intake that doesn’t mean they are all Eton-educated white men, whilst in some ways going to oxbridge puts you at a disadvantage due to the difficulties of getting experience. I’m in my final year and only know of three people with jobs lined up - many have been unable to get jobs/ want a few years off to recover!

 

[Jessica Booker]

** PLEASE READ**

I realise I haven’t helped this but we have completely derailed this thread.

If anyone wants to keep this debate up about diversity or Oxbridge, please start a new thread in the general discussions section of the forum, so people who only want vacation scheme updates can keep an eye out for them.

 

[SaLM]

Do you know whether all offices are giving responses or just the london one atm?

I'm not sure as I only applied to London - if the other offices have ACs still to run then I assume it was just London.
If you go to their application hub your status should have been updated to either withdrawn/rejected or offer made

 

[Bread]

I really don't think the argument that people who go to Oxbridge work harder than others because Oxbridge is difficult and intense is a fair one. People are plenty hard working and intelligent wherever they go. It's not justifiable to say (or imply) that Oxbridge people are more intelligent than anyone who doesn't go there.

I did not say or imply that, I don’t even go there 😂
I was trying to rationalise why there appears to be a prevalence of Oxbridge students at ACs, but as it turns out it doesn’t make a big difference. I just think it’s counterproductive to pin rejection on a class of people having an “edge,” whether it be Oxbridge students or as someone said earlier minorities?!?? That’s got to be the worst take I’ve seen on this forum. Anyway, wishing you the best of luck for your applications

 

[Zi48]

Do any other neurodivergents here struggle with some of the tests these firms require?

I am never going to be able to perform well when given a picture of a face and asked what mood that person is in.

Mayer Brown’s communication styles part of the test, where you were given three paragraphs of text and five responses and asked to link the responses to the paragraph that most matches its communication style, was also a struggle—they were all the bloody same.

I can’t help but feel these tests just set me up for failure. I write strong applications but I’m always rejected after these stupid tests.

Edit: Browne Jacobson agrees - https://www.brownejacobson.com/about/news-media/thinking-outside-the-box

For Mayer Brown’s test they offer extra time if you request adjustments, I believe they can also consider it retrospectively if you didn’t request the adjustments before the test.

I would definitely disclose your neurodiversity to firms to see what adjustments they may have

 

[3000to1shoteverytime]

If you hypothetically had two vac scheme offers on clashing dates so could only accept one - how would go about deciding which one to choose in this situation?
One of the firms I have been fortunate enough to receive an offer from is well-regarded and has a reputation for converting the majority of its vac schemers to TC offers. The other firm, however, is arguably more prestigious (better paid) and aligns more closely with my long term career interests, but has a much lower conversion rate to TCs.
Essentially trying to weigh-up the choice between picking the firm I like more (riskier but may offer better career prospects if it works out) vs the firm with more certainty of getting a TC.

I guess it comes down to how much do you back yourself. Ask the other of they will consider you direct for TC instead.

 

[Seven]

If you hypothetically had two vac scheme offers on clashing dates so could only accept one - how would go about deciding which one to choose in this situation?
One of the firms I have been fortunate enough to receive an offer from is well-regarded and has a reputation for converting the majority of its vac schemers to TC offers. The other firm, however, is arguably more prestigious (better paid) and aligns more closely with my long term career interests, but has a much lower conversion rate to TCs.
Essentially trying to weigh-up the choice between picking the firm I like more (riskier but may offer better career prospects if it works out) vs the firm with more certainty of getting a TC.

I would honestly go with the firm that has more certainty of getting a TC to minimise your chances of having to go through yet another application cycle. You could always laterally move once you become a qualified associate. The salary for most trainees at well-regarded firms are usually the same (c. 50k-55k). It's only at the associate stage which you'll see the big difference.

 

[Kodak123]

This isnt true unfortunately (I am BAME and went to a state school). Almost all of us struggle in some way at Oxbridge, it is just about how much you show it lol. Achieving top marks at Oxbridge is undoubtedly difficult regardless of your background

Facts, it’s like they don’t get

 

[bangarangbass39]

Hey, where did you find your portal? I can’t find mine for some reason. Also do you know if they r sending out calls and emails about results? I also did the AC with you🥲

If you go to the website where you application is stored. The log in for careers at Fieldfisher. It will show the application you submitted and its status. I don't want to say that's what their verdict is. It just shocked me that an update like that had been made without me knowing. I only noticed this because I wanted to go through a response I submitted for a similar question that came up in another application. Take my information very lightly as you won't know what they think until they say.

 

[Jessica Booker]

If you hypothetically had two vac scheme offers on clashing dates so could only accept one - how would go about deciding which one to choose in this situation?
One of the firms I have been fortunate enough to receive an offer from is well-regarded and has a reputation for converting the majority of its vac schemers to TC offers. The other firm, however, is arguably more prestigious (better paid) and aligns more closely with my long term career interests, but has a much lower conversion rate to TCs.
Essentially trying to weigh-up the choice between picking the firm I like more (riskier but may offer better career prospects if it works out) vs the firm with more certainty of getting a TC.

I’d choose the firm you can see yourself most likely wanting to work for.

Obviously you could look at how likely you are to convert, but ultimately turning down a firm is one of the quickest way to shut a door to being hired by that firm in the near future.