Just want to contribute to the ongoing disagreement. Mitigating circumstances can often be real evidence as to a candidates overall potential, and can evidence that they are capable of more than they achieved. Academics are an incredibly poor metric of success in the legal world. Law firms use academic results as a filter because it can broadly be representative, increasingly those that have stricter academic requirements use it because they need to find a way to cope with the number of applicants. 2:1 across the board is harsh yes, but GR are very aware that a single 2:2 in your first year is very different to graduating with a high 2:1.
To say that low(er) paying firms attract a different standard of candidate would be categorically untrue. The legal industry generally is very competitive, and high quality candidates can be found everywhere thanks to everyones very different aspirations. Furthermore, a fellow applicant telling you whether your application is competitive or not comes with a hefty grain of salt. No one, aside from GR and those experienced in legal recruiting, can actually tell you if you truly are a competitive applicant or not because it is weighed against the pool of other applicants. Not meeting a strict grade requirement (stricter than is industry standard) categorically does not extinguish you from success at other firms.
Owing someones lack of success to their "lack of DEI or mitigating circumstances" is a great way to pigeon hole yourself into hating the system and not focusing on how you can improve your own standing as an applicant. Especially if your advice is "don't apply because you don't have XYZ". It reduces fellow applicants down to try and make yourself feel better. If you yourself don't feel confident in your application because you have a conceited and "world is against me" mentality does not mean you should push that onto other people. We have no idea the circumstances, challenges and adversity faced by anyone else and pushing a negative mentality doesn't help anyone.
To say that low(er) paying firms attract a different standard of candidate would be categorically untrue. The legal industry generally is very competitive, and high quality candidates can be found everywhere thanks to everyones very different aspirations. Furthermore, a fellow applicant telling you whether your application is competitive or not comes with a hefty grain of salt. No one, aside from GR and those experienced in legal recruiting, can actually tell you if you truly are a competitive applicant or not because it is weighed against the pool of other applicants. Not meeting a strict grade requirement (stricter than is industry standard) categorically does not extinguish you from success at other firms.
Owing someones lack of success to their "lack of DEI or mitigating circumstances" is a great way to pigeon hole yourself into hating the system and not focusing on how you can improve your own standing as an applicant. Especially if your advice is "don't apply because you don't have XYZ". It reduces fellow applicants down to try and make yourself feel better. If you yourself don't feel confident in your application because you have a conceited and "world is against me" mentality does not mean you should push that onto other people. We have no idea the circumstances, challenges and adversity faced by anyone else and pushing a negative mentality doesn't help anyone.
(done test on Saturday) 
. Best of luck
. A candidate is not “lucky” if they make it with average grades but it takes a lot of hard work, part time roles, work experience, street smartness, etc and maybe 10% luck to get a vac scheme or tc. I say this because that is how I got my legal work experience year at a top silver circle firm.
