TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2023-24

[Seven]

Anyone else completely ghosted by HL when requesting for WG report?

 

[bella98]

Anyone else completely ghosted by HL when requesting for WG report?

Mee 🤣🤣🤣

 

[Anaros]

Hello. Has anyone heard back from Linklaters Vacation Scheme application - 2023/24?

 

[EM23]

Passed the VI for Burness Paull 🙌 Now onto the aptitude tests, or as I like to call it: the 'end of the road'.

I just did the aptitude tests! God they were long 😭

 

[wannabesheridansmith]

I just did the aptitude tests! God they were long 😭

I'll be sure to block enough time out the day for the test and then time to cry afterwards... best of luck though, I'm sure you smashed those diagrams! 😂

 

[andrea99]

Anyone applying for MoFo that hasnt applied yet? Chambers students' Instagram said that the deadline was extended but it hasn't been updated on MoFo's website! anyone know where they're getting their information from 😂

 

[Szofi66]

Has anyone still not heard from HL on direct TC? I haven't even received the WG link and I applied back in November.

 

[Seven]

Anyone applying for MoFo that hasnt applied yet? Chambers students' Instagram said that the deadline was extended but it hasn't been updated on MoFo's website! anyone know where they're getting their information from 😂

On MoFo’s IG page

 

[Manuchelsout]

On MoFo’s IG page

What is the word limit for their questions

 

[Appleju1ce]

HSF AC Invite, if anyone has any advice/insight I would appreciate it greatly

 

[Untilwinter]

Honestly I used to hate that question. In the past, I have always opted for something I think the firm would like to see I have knowledge of even if I had no interest in the matter itself - such as highly technical finance news stories.

As a result, my answer to the “how would this affect the firm” part of the question would always have to be “it’ll bring in more work” and I felt it consistently lacked commercial depth.

This cycle I opted to scratch all that and went for news stories that actually interested me, or that I was genuinely curious about. For example, discussions surrounding legalising cannabis, the new AI legislation, the controversy surrounding Disney contracts.

I found that when I went for topics that I was genuinely intrigued by, provided it sort of sat within the realm of any of the firms core practice areas, I found I had more to say on political, social, and economic levels.

It doesn’t have to be the biggest news story out there, it simply has to be something you genuinely would look into - and from that you will see a change in thinking and writing, which will translate further into the application.

I can’t say this is a definitive rule - it just simply worked best for me. I was tired of trying to sound like an economist when in truth I could not care less about what I was reading.

Step 1: Look at the practice areas the firm is strong in, what areas are bringing in the most money or what they do the most in. Firms will usually say the type of matters they work on within a certain practice area. For example, Reed Smith work on Section 280 tax notices for cannabis within its cannabis industry (a US practice per se, but may have implications firm-wide when you consider investment opportunities).

Step 2: Do a general google search of those industries/practice areas and see what’s happening out there.

Step 3: Find an article that interests you, of which ever one you consider to have the most impact on the firm, given its work in that area.

Thank you so much for the advice!!!!
I am still struggling with a few aspects of these types of questions. Could I message you if that's ok?

 

[bella98]

The use of generative AI in recruitment is a particularly hot topic amongst candidates and recruitment teams alike. What are your views on candidates using generative AI in recruitment processes? Is it cheating, or being resourceful? Does it level the playing field, or make it harder for some? There is no right or wrong answer to this question (yet!), but we are interested to hear your opinions on this topic.

How would you guys approach this question? Personally, I believe that these tools can help candidates articulate their experiences and skills more effectively, ensuring that their applications are reflective of their true capabilities and potential. Especially for individuals who may struggle with expressing themselves in writing or face barriers due to various factors such as neurodiversity, AI can level the playing field, providing an opportunity to present themselves in the best light. This doesn't necessarily equate to cheating, provided the candidates are honest about their experiences, their skills and the role AI played in their application.

I know they say there is no right or wrong answer, but I'm aware that many firms are strongly against the use of AI in this context. Given this situation, how should I approach this issue? Should I voice my true opinion, or align with the more commonly held view against AI usage in job applications?
I also recognise that recruitment processes are designed not just to know a candidate's experiences and skills, but also test their communication skills. And AI-generated responses can obscure this quality.

@Jessica Booker , I would be interested in knowing your opinion. Thank you!

 

[Ali A]

How strict are W&C on undergraduate grades? I graduated with a 64% but I have 2 modules that are 2.2 (no mitigating circumstances, just exam stress). I’m not sure if I should apply because I heard that they prefer candidates with a strong 2.1 (though this is not explicitly said on their website)

I would apply if I was you. I know people (including me) who had grades similar to you who got on to the scheme with some converting this into a TC!

 

[Untilwinter]

The use of generative AI in recruitment is a particularly hot topic amongst candidates and recruitment teams alike. What are your views on candidates using generative AI in recruitment processes? Is it cheating, or being resourceful? Does it level the playing field, or make it harder for some? There is no right or wrong answer to this question (yet!), but we are interested to hear your opinions on this topic.

How would you guys approach this question? Personally, I believe that these tools can help candidates articulate their experiences and skills more effectively, ensuring that their applications are reflective of their true capabilities and potential. Especially for individuals who may struggle with expressing themselves in writing or face barriers due to various factors such as neurodiversity, AI can level the playing field, providing an opportunity to present themselves in the best light. This doesn't necessarily equate to cheating, provided the candidates are honest about their experiences, their skills and the role AI played in their application.

I know they say there is no right or wrong answer, but I'm aware that many firms are strongly against the use of AI in this context. Given this situation, how should I approach this issue? Should I voice my true opinion, or align with the more commonly held view against AI usage in job applications?
I also recognise that recruitment processes are designed not just to know a candidate's experiences and skills, but also test their communication skills. And AI-generated responses can obscure this quality.

@Jessica Booker , I would be interested in knowing your opinion. Thank you!

Not sure how to answer that in an application, but I genuinely agree with your point.
I am neurodiverse and because of it I sometimes struggle to put my thoughts into words. So AI has been life changing for me. It helps me brainstorm cause it's like having someone talking with me about a topic. Even if I am not using it, the fact that I have something that can help me put my thoughts into words eases my anxiety.
Plus, AI is inevitably going to be integrated into various aspects of our lives and using AI is a skill in itself (eg. prompting chat gpt).

 

[Dae]

can I ask Freshfields for my Watson Glaiser score?

 

[GWJlaw]

Not sure how to answer that in an application, but I genuinely agree with your point.
I am neurodiverse and because of it I sometimes struggle to put my thoughts into words. So AI has been life changing for me. It helps me brainstorm cause it's like having someone talking with me about a topic. Even if I am not using it, the fact that I have something that can help me put my thoughts into words eases my anxiety.
Plus, AI is inevitably going to be integrated into various aspects of our lives and using AI is a skill in itself (eg. prompting chat gpt).

I would say make sure you outline which generative AI platform your referring to, be specific. Chat GPT and Grammerly both use generative AI but they're very different in their capabilities. I would also talk about subscription packages - GPT 4 and Grammerly plus both require a paid subscription - consider that when discussing the playing field.

 

[Manuchelsout]

Anything from simmons

 

[Legalregal]

How did people spend on the Mills and Reeves assessment?

 

[EliteWhovian]

The use of generative AI in recruitment is a particularly hot topic amongst candidates and recruitment teams alike. What are your views on candidates using generative AI in recruitment processes? Is it cheating, or being resourceful? Does it level the playing field, or make it harder for some? There is no right or wrong answer to this question (yet!), but we are interested to hear your opinions on this topic.

How would you guys approach this question? Personally, I believe that these tools can help candidates articulate their experiences and skills more effectively, ensuring that their applications are reflective of their true capabilities and potential. Especially for individuals who may struggle with expressing themselves in writing or face barriers due to various factors such as neurodiversity, AI can level the playing field, providing an opportunity to present themselves in the best light. This doesn't necessarily equate to cheating, provided the candidates are honest about their experiences, their skills and the role AI played in their application.

I know they say there is no right or wrong answer, but I'm aware that many firms are strongly against the use of AI in this context. Given this situation, how should I approach this issue? Should I voice my true opinion, or align with the more commonly held view against AI usage in job applications?
I also recognise that recruitment processes are designed not just to know a candidate's experiences and skills, but also test their communication skills. And AI-generated responses can obscure this quality.

@Jessica Booker , I would be interested in knowing your opinion. Thank you!

Out of curiosity, which firm is this for? That's a very unique question

 

[thenublawyer]

What is the word limit for their questions

no limit