TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[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?

 

[TortillaTC]

How many WE entries is "too many" on an open day application? Goodwin doesn't have an additional Q about extracurriculars, so I'm including that under WE too + open days/events experience alongside actual WE.

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

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!

Hello!

That's a really good question. I would say that "law-related work experience" is usually interpreted quite broadly - it doesn't have to be limited to time spent in a law firm. Client-side legal work, where you've had exposure to legal issues or worked with lawyers, definitely counts. Legal recruitment can also be framed as law-related, especially if it gave you insight into how firms operate, the skills they value, and the industry as a whole. The key is showing how those experiences have developed skills or understanding that are relevant to a legal career.

In relation to Forage, if there wasn't a specific space dedicated to Forage tasks, I usually placed mine in the work experience section. If you have done a few, it might be handy to group them together so that they take up less space in the section - but I think either way would be perfectly fine!

I hope that helps

 

[GT1205H]

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!

Hi, I have to disagree with the other member that said they are not proper work experience. During events and fairs I have spoken to multiple firms’ recruiters (S&M, HL, Linklaters, A&O to name a few) and asked them about Forage.

They absolutely love it and value it, to quote a recruiter from Linklaters “of course we want to hear about, they take 4-5 hours to complete so of course they are valuable, but specially what you learn from it”.

So my understanding is the value depends on what you actually got from it, was it legal concepts? Was it a practice area? Did you learn about the role of a trainee? The firms work?

I would advise that if you have a many of those (not from the firm) maybe put together 2-3 in one single entry (highlighting what you got). If you have done the firms programme then I would recommend making it an entry and talked about what you got from it and at the end you can mention briefly others that you have completed if different in content from the firm’s one.

 

[Abbie Whitlock]

any advice for technical case studies?

Hey!

For technical case studies, I have previously found that a good approach is to break them down into different steps:

1. Understand the problem clearly - take a moment to restate the brief in your own words and identify what the key issue or objective is. This shows that you're thinking critically and not jumping straight into a solution. I always found that when I ensured that I understood the actual issue being discussed, I found it easier to then tackle the solutions and consequences and discuss this with the interviewers (if applicable).
2. Structure your answer - I would use a simple framework (e.g. outline the problem, explore possible solutions, weigh the pros / cons, and then recommend a solution based on that balance). Even if your solution isn't perfect, if you show your thought process through a clear structure, this demonstrates strong reasoning.
3. Talk through your thought process - similar to the above, interviewers often case more about how you think rather than whether you get the "right" answer. I would be transparent about any assumptions that you are making, and flag where you would need to find out more information before making a definitive answer.

It can also help to practice a few examples in advance, so that you get comfortable explaining your reasoning aloud. There are some great resources available on TCLA that I utilised when preparing for case studies (these can be found in the TCLA Wiki, which has a ton of other handy threads):

• Definitive Guide to Law Firm Case Studies by Jacob Miller
• Private Equity: A Basic Guide by Amma Usman

I hope that helps - best of luck, you've got this!