TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2025-26

[angdps]

hate to bring this up again but has anyone heard back from Baker Mckenzie for spring ACs at all? or have they just not sent them out to anyone

 

[ADhillon01]

Clyde & Co online assessment invite (for spring vac scheme - applied Jan 6th)

Yeaa same - applied 5th Jan 🤝

 

[anon78365222111]

hate to bring this up again but has anyone heard back from Baker Mckenzie for spring ACs at all? or have they just not sent them out to anyone

One person mentioned they got one but were only given two dates idk if they’re doing batches

 

[xMontmorency]

Has anyone been seeing the amount of junior lawyers leaving to either go in-house or leaving big law altogether these past few days? Or maybe my LinkedIn algorithm is just biased lol. But it makes me wonder why... especially when I see people leaving the firms I'm currently fighting tooth and nail to get into lol.

Granted, it could just be their preference, a growing generational phenomenon, or wanting more of a work life balance etc., but it does make me worry that there might be something deeper...

Edit: and yes I know we tend to see more of these at this time of year since bonuses have been paid etc. but still makes me wonder haha

It's known as associate attrition. It's entirely normal and, from the law firm's point of view, vitally necessary as part of the business model. Law firms, like consulting firms and investment banks, run a pyramid or 'up or out' model. You only need about 5-10 individuals in a class of 80-100 trainees to make partner. The rest have to go. Either to another firm, because they want to leave big law, or because they don't make the cut.

Look at Slaughter and May. At a low around 15 years ago they only had 85 partners in London. Now they're at around 120. They allegedly recruit 90 trainees a year, but last year promoted only 6 new partners (and 5 the year before). You do the maths.

They hire so many trainees/associates because they want to ensure they maintain a partner:associate leverage at around 3 or 4 (i.e. 3-4 associates per partner) to maximise billing potential, and to do all the grunge work. It also helps MC firms because a huge number of former trainees and associates land roles in-house at corporates, banks and PE houses, making it more likely that they will award work to their former firm.

From the associate who's quitting's perspective, it's not that bad. Some in-house roles are highly sought after, high paying, career-enhancing moves (just look at how much tech GCs earn in the US). You may take a small pay cut, but there are other benefits. Cushy job. No pressure to bill. Hours are way better.

Also, it's not unheard of to see people returning from in-house roles to become law firm partners: cf Angharad Lewis, David Holdsworth, Kai Zeng, Jeremy Dennison.

 

[ilikelaw]

does anyone else's text formatting get really messed up by CVmail because why am I previewing my application and all of a sudden random strings of words have all been merged together 😭 😭 😭

 

[LawAspirer]

Cooley WG

 

[ilikelaw]

Cooley WG

congrats ! when did you submit?

 

[elle woods]

It's known as associate attrition. It's entirely normal and, from the law firm's point of view, vitally necessary as part of the business model. Law firms, like consulting firms and investment banks, run a pyramid or 'up or out' model. You only need about 5-10 individuals in a class of 80-100 trainees to make partner. The rest have to go. Either to another firm, because they want to leave big law, or because they don't make the cut.

Look at Slaughter and May. At a low around 15 years ago they only had 85 partners in London. Now they're at around 120. They allegedly recruit 90 trainees a year, but last year promoted only 6 new partners (and 5 the year before). You do the maths.

They hire so many trainees/associates because they want to ensure they maintain a partner:associate leverage at around 3 or 4 (i.e. 3-4 associates per partner) to maximise billing potential, and to do all the grunge work. It also helps MC firms because a huge number of former trainees and associates land roles in-house at corporates, banks and PE houses, making it more likely that they will award work to their former firm.

From the associate who's quitting's perspective, it's not that bad. Some in-house roles are highly sought after, high paying, career-enhancing moves (just look at how much tech GCs earn in the US). You may take a small pay cut, but there are other benefits. Cushy job. No pressure to bill. Hours are way better.

Also, it's not unheard of to see people returning from in-house roles to become law firm partners: cf Angharad Lewis, David Holdsworth, Kai Zeng, Jeremy Dennison.

I see! That's very interesting.

I appreciate you writing all of this out! I definitely understand a lot better now.
Also it's good to know that you're able to return to big law after leaving it!

 

[ladyhaleinthehouse]

One person mentioned they got one but were only given two dates idk if they’re doing batches

Yeah, seems weird that only one person has received an invite so far. Potentially delusion-fuelled, but I think its likely that they haven't fully released invites yet

 

[tc2026]

Does anyone know Latham AC dates? xx

 

[aria_d]

Hi! I was doing mt Vinson & Elkins application, and was putting in my A-Level equivalent grades but it won't let me choose 2024 as the year. Did anyone come across this problem? Should I just put 2023 and email gradrec?

 

[ilikelaw]

I STRONGLY DISLIKE CVMAIL!

 

[legal18]

Dm me if you get anything please.

No one has

 

[Shaky_Pete]

It's known as associate attrition. It's entirely normal and, from the law firm's point of view, vitally necessary as part of the business model. Law firms, like consulting firms and investment banks, run a pyramid or 'up or out' model. You only need about 5-10 individuals in a class of 80-100 trainees to make partner. The rest have to go. Either to another firm, because they want to leave big law, or because they don't make the cut.

Look at Slaughter and May. At a low around 15 years ago they only had 85 partners in London. Now they're at around 120. They allegedly recruit 90 trainees a year, but last year promoted only 6 new partners (and 5 the year before). You do the maths.

They hire so many trainees/associates because they want to ensure they maintain a partner:associate leverage at around 3 or 4 (i.e. 3-4 associates per partner) to maximise billing potential, and to do all the grunge work. It also helps MC firms because a huge number of former trainees and associates land roles in-house at corporates, banks and PE houses, making it more likely that they will award work to their former firm.

From the associate who's quitting's perspective, it's not that bad. Some in-house roles are highly sought after, high paying, career-enhancing moves (just look at how much tech GCs earn in the US). You may take a small pay cut, but there are other benefits. Cushy job. No pressure to bill. Hours are way better.

Also, it's not unheard of to see people returning from in-house roles to become law firm partners: cf Angharad Lewis, David Holdsworth, Kai Zeng, Jeremy Dennison.

Interested how firms get rid of associates to realise this - does it tend to be through formal redundancy or 'managing out'?

 

[ArthurWeasleyLaw]

Does we think Cooley will have finished alerting people of whether they have reached the WG stage? Or more tomorrow?

 

[ilikelaw]

Does we think Cooley will have finished alerting people of whether they have reached the WG stage? Or more tomorrow?

i hope they send out more 😓😓

 

[sadlawyer01]

Cooley WG

hi is this for spring or summer?

 

[cookedlawstudent]

Sorry to hear that 😞

Will likely be the same for me. Got ABC at A-level, 2.1 at undergraduate, Distinction for my LLM and 12 years experience in a demanding career but yes, let’s focus on exams I took when I was barely 18… 🤦🏻‍♂️

Same for WFW, which is a shame as I am really interested in the maritime sector!

I find it so frustrating at times, but I've just accepted that it's the way things go. I know that the people who have met the A-level requirements worked incredibly hard for it, so I get why they would want them over me. But at the same time, I feel like I've compensated for a poor performance when I was 18. Onto the next ig

 

[M85672]

Have post VI rejections gone out for White & Case yet? Asking because with how it went I would’ve expected a rejection by now

 

[cookedlawstudent]

In other news, I saw someone was invited to the Freshfields January AC.....please reject me so I can move on