General Discussion Thread 2020-21

[Jaysen]

Hi All,

This only applies to a small minority of people, but just a quick note:

One of the great things about this forum is how candidates will often share insights/experiences to help other candidates. Now, while there's nothing wrong with messaging a candidate privately after they post, please also respect the fact that it's completely within their right to not want to share more information. If they don't want to do so, please don't pester them - it's just going to stop people from wanting to share information with the rest of the forum.

Thanks!

 

[Miki3999]

Dentons Telephone Interview! No idea what sort of questions to expect at all, so I would appreciate any tips!

 

[STWO]

Those compliance roles will be competitive too - I have recruited a number of compliance roles, and despite it not being the most attractive area, they will be as popular as paralegal roles, especially in areas like Finance/Investment

If you have 3-4+ years experience, 30k will be much more possible than those coming straight out of uni.

Well I guess there really isn't any job out there that isn't competitive right?

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

Well I guess there really isn't any job out there that isn't competitive right?

probably not in the next 6 months, no.... unless you want to work in social care.

But the area you are in will be one of those that is actually less competitive than you think

 

[Charles]

Anyone heard from Bakers or Dentons re online tests? I applied on 25 March

hey this is in regards to Baker I applied March 08 and I did an online test this saturday. They said they will get back to me April 20 with the results.

 

[Ifmhouse4]

Thanks for the advice, hope it went well! I was just wondering whether there were any commercial questions?

Hi there, no nothing like that for me personally!

 

[Pallatablelawyer]

Hi everyone! I have an interview for a vacation scheme at Arnold & Porter coming up and I was wondering if anyone had any tips? Thanks in advance!

When did you get your invite

 

[TLC20]

probably not in the next 6 months, no.... unless you want to work in social care.

But the area you are in will be one of those that is actually less competitive than you think

Hi there - I know theres been quite a lot of comments on this already. However, thought it may be useful to come in on the point of civil service outside of the Fast Stream there are a lot of other CS professions which have starting salaries in pay band D/HEO which is upwards of £32k. If you've paralegalled for 3/4 years you should have plenty to offer particularly in Project Delivery roles which is a huge amount of what key departments do. Also despite the challenging times Government is still recruiting and not just experts.

Happy to share more insights for context I was a private/public sector paralegal for 3.5years before joining Government and receiving promotions/pay increases (alongside that I also done LPC masters conversion and quite a bit of professional development in my departments).

 

[Changes]

Agree with the above - although even roles in the civil service are unlikely to meet the £30k mark unless you are going in with experience or a very specific set of knowledge they need.

But even then those roles are more competitive than law firms to be frank with people! Having seen how recruitment works across various sectors, including the civil service, law is actually one of the least competitive sectors - it just sets very high standards/has high expectations.

Try applying to some finance roles in the investment industry where you can easily get over 1000 applications per vacancy!

I was on the Civil Service Fast stream. Starting salary was £31.5k but varies by department, some paid more but they’re all around the £30k mark (this was back when I graduated 7 or so years ago so may well have gone up). The trouble is there isn’t much scope for increase...the average career high salary for fast streamers is about £55k. The only saving grace is the pension.

Civil Service was tougher than big 4 in terms of assessment process but I personally think law is more competitive than CS, for graduate level roles anyway. I had 1.5 days of assessment centres and the standard was high but if you met it you got a job...it was also a lot easier to get to that stage than it is for city law firms.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

I was on the Civil Service Fast stream. Starting salary was £31.5k but varies by department, some paid more but they’re all around the £30k mark (this was back when I graduated 7 or so years ago so may well have gone up). The trouble is there isn’t much scope for increase...the average career high salary for fast streamers is about £55k. The only saving grace is the pension.

Civil Service was tougher than big 4 in terms of assessment process but I personally think law is more competitive than CS, for graduate level roles anyway. I had 1.5 days of assessment centres and the standard was high but if you met it you got a job...it was also a lot easier to get to that stage than it is for city law firms.

Current minimum starting salary for the CSFS is £27k. HM Treasury’s is £28.5k, GLS is £28k.

I know the recruitment well - trust me it’s far more competitive in general, they are just looking for every different things than law firms who are just super selective in what they want.

Does depend on what CS department you apply to though. The GES scheme given the eligibility criteria is far less competitive than some of the general programmes. Their assessment centres typically work on a basis of 2.5-3 candidates per vacancy though.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ice_Fast_Stream_Annual_Report_2017_-_2018.pdf

Other difference with CS hiring is that it is all based on the best candidates getting the job. However this does mean that they offer no matter what the standard - they don’t tend to re-recruit. Law firms don’t do that - if candidates aren’t good enough, they won’t hire and would just reopen applications (so highly unlikely though).

My comment about the CS was about the CS more generally though. Many more grads enter the CS on non graduate scheme routes, and on lower pay grades.

 

[S87]

I am finishing the GDL in a couple of months but have not yet managed to secure a TC. I am hesitant about starting the LPC in September because I don't have a TC, so I am looking to potentially paralegal/intern for the next academic year. Does anyone have any advice about applying for paralegal/intern positions, or has been in a similar situation to the one I am in?

If anyone has any advice I would be very grateful

So, I like your strategy but take into account two elements.

1) most of the jobs advertised require the LPC which makes sense. So in order to overcome this hurdle, I would consider taking part in various projects with companies like Epiq Global, KLDiscovery. These are companies to whom law firms outsource document review type of work. I know people who also worked at the Serious Fraud Office without the LPC.
2) It took me months to find a paralegal position but things changed once I accepted a non-legal role. I worked in Insurance (boring admin job) and it completely changed my career.

 

[Changes]

Current minimum starting salary for the CSFS is £27k. HM Treasury’s is £28.5k, GLS is £28k.

I know the recruitment well - trust me it’s far more competitive in general, they are just looking for every different things than law firms who are just super selective in what they want.

Does depend on what CS department you apply to though. The GES scheme given the eligibility criteria is far less competitive than some of the general programmes. Their assessment centres typically work on a basis of 2.5-3 candidates per vacancy though.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...ice_Fast_Stream_Annual_Report_2017_-_2018.pdf

Other difference with CS hiring is that it is all based on the best candidates getting the job. However this does mean that they offer no matter what the standard - they don’t tend to re-recruit. Law firms don’t do that - if candidates aren’t good enough, they won’t hire and would just reopen applications (so highly unlikely though).

My comment about the CS was about the CS more generally though. Many more grads enter the CS on non graduate scheme routes, and on lower pay grades.

Fair enough, that's interesting to know. Is that in terms of the percentage of applicants who get a place in law vs Civil Service? I guess there would be a smaller pool of applicants for law. I do think a training contract is tougher to get but I guess that's not the same thing. I may also be forgetting how tough and rigorous the assessment centres were, you could be amazing at 5/7 of the broad things they're looking for but still get rejected based on not meeting the minimum in the other two. Plus in law it's amplified by the fact you're going through the stages multiple times due to the number of applications you need to make, so that's probably skewed my view.

Re: GES, I agree to some extent but then you still had to pass the fast stream assessment centre, so you were competing against generalists and if you passed you're passing the same tests as the generalists. So personally I'd say GES and other technical streams are harder, as you have to pass both the fast stream and technical assessment centres (but they also pay more and I don't know if things have changed since). The GES used to end up with a shortage of fast streamers as a result, plenty of colleagues failed the Fast Stream AC and came in below HEO. They ended up in the same place in the long run though. I know a lot of the chief economists weren't keen on the fast stream for that reason, they were looking for more specific skills, possibly not too dissimilarly to law firms.

Re: standards - in my experience they do reopen if no candidates meet the required standard, you have to meet the minimum requirements - though I have known some terrible candidates get promotions into different departments. I put that more down to flaws in the focus on competencies and the subjectivity of those minimum standards, you could be terrible but say the right buzzwords and get through. My experiences are limited to the departments I worked in though, plus things may have changed since then.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

Re: standards - in my experience they do reopen if no candidates meet the required standard, you have to meet the minimum requirements - though I have known some terrible candidates get promotions into different departments. I put that more down to flaws in the focus on competencies and the subjectivity of those minimum standards, you could be terrible but say the right buzzwords and get through. My experiences are limited to the departments I worked in though, plus things may have changed since then.

I think competitiveness and standards/requirements keep getting mixed up in this conversation.

Application numbers per vacancy are generally much higher for CS departments than law - there are some exceptions where specific requirements are needed (like GES). I’d say overall standard of candidates are actually very similar it is just that law firms are looking for very specific things, while CS departments are looking for more generalist skills/attitudes. That will be “tougher” for some people and easier for others.

CS departments set a minimum pass mark for candidates and then rank people based on scores, both at screening and at assessment centres. Those with the highest scores get offers first. They have to do this due to their hiring principles, auditing and reporting required. Means plenty of people can do well in assessments but are not the right candidates - that doesn’t happen in law (and many other industries).

 

[epwz98]

Hi, can I ask what’s the standard when it comes to case study? Because I usually do quite well with competency and commercial knowledge, but I find the case study quite tricky and there are usually moments where I give the wrong answers or am unsure.

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

Hi, can I ask what’s the standard when it comes to case study? Because I usually do quite well with competency and commercial knowledge, but I find the case study quite tricky and there are usually moments where I give the wrong answers or am unsure.

There isn’t an answer to this question.

It will depend on the case study/the firm.

 

[Alice G]

Hi, can I ask what’s the standard when it comes to case study? Because I usually do quite well with competency and commercial knowledge, but I find the case study quite tricky and there are usually moments where I give the wrong answers or am unsure.

case studies are known to be a tough assessment. I think that each firm will assess differently and it is possible to do well in one case study and miss the mark with another. It is a hard question to answer as standards do tend to be high but you are judged holistically. They appreciate people do not know everything but they will want to see some commercial knowledge. They will be looking for how you communicate and the clarity of this. They are looking at how you can keep to time and cover the things you have been asked to. They will also be looking for the way in which you think and arrive at the responses you do. This sounds like a lot but practice does make perfect and just keep building your commercial awareness and try to interrogate news and sources more critically

 

[Changes]

Yeah, the minimum standard is based on the competency they’re testing being “reasonably met”. This used to be scoring 3/5 and you had to score at least a 3 for all of the competencies tested to be considered. It then changed to being out of 7 with a 4/7 being the standard. The competency framework is quite specific about what these scores mean for each grade and competency, though it is still open to interpretation. On reopening, I was referring to posts outside of the Fast Stream.

But anyway, I doubt many people on this forum are interested in hearing about the Civil Service, so I’ll shut up.

What do law firms do differently when comparing candidates that means that doesn’t happen?

Thanks!

 

[TCLA Community Assistant]

Yeah, the minimum standard is based on the competency they’re testing being “reasonably met”. This used to be scoring 3/5 and you had to score at least a 3 for all of the competencies tested to be considered. It then changed to being out of 7 with a 4/7 being the standard. The competency framework is quite specific about what these scores mean for each grade and competency, though it is still open to interpretation. On reopening, I was referring to posts outside of the Fast Stream.

But anyway, I doubt many people on this forum are interested in hearing about the Civil Service, so I’ll shut up.

What do law firms do differently when comparing candidates that means that doesn’t happen?

Thanks!

I know plenty of situations where candidates score highly in recruitment processes for law firms but don’t get offers. That wouldn’t happen in the CS.

There also tends to be no ranking system in law firms, just a benchmark. CS system generally is more sophisticated (competency frameworks) while law firms will look at things more holistically. Joys of the freedoms of not having to publish these bits of information or be concerned about FOI requests.

 

[Changes]

I know plenty of situations where candidates score highly in recruitment processes for law firms but don’t get offers. That wouldn’t happen in the CS.

There also tends to be no ranking system in law firms, just a benchmark. CS system generally is more sophisticated (competency frameworks) while law firms will look at things more holistically. Joys of the freedoms of not having publish these things or be concerned about FOI requests.

I know plenty of situations where candidates score highly in recruitment processes for law firms but don’t get offers. That wouldn’t happen in the CS.

There also tends to be no ranking system in law firms, just a benchmark. CS system generally is more sophisticated (competency frameworks) while law firms will look at things more holistically. Joys of the freedoms of not having to publish these bits of information or be concerned about FOI requests.

That’s useful and interesting - thanks. Just out of interest, do you think that causes issues with diversity or maybe has done in the past, or could potentially mean the opposite?

 

[X33]

@Jessica Booker On the topic of civil service and careers other than law: I’ve heard that City solicitors tend to stay in law (either at a city firm or in-house), compared to other sectors like banking and consultancy, which have greater exit options.

Is this true in your experience? Obviously this is a massive generalisation, and loads of people have different career paths. But what do lawyers tend to do when they approach the later PQE stages, have slim prospects of partnerships, and look for other opportunities? Do many of them go into politics, banking, running their own businesses etc.?