Law Firm Milkrounds 20/21

Diamond_Hands

Just to be clear, there's not much point applying to the same firm you've been rejected from again unless you've done something meaningful or impressive in the meantime. That's just the reality. They'll just reject you again if your app is the exact same.

law987

Their application got through, it was only at interview stage, so definitely worth re-applying imo

LawBoy2018

If you're not getting interviews with the firms of your choice after more than one attempt, your grades are likely too low imo. You need to apply for legal exec/paralegal roles and then apply once you already have your foot in the door.

AA247

Agreed if you got rejected from traineeship at interview stage and re-applied for the traineeship, application won’t get through unless you have loads more achieved since then. But if you’re rejected from traineeship and apply for the internship they will still look at your application. Criteria is different for both programmes.

I interviewed for top 10 firm for traineeship couple of years back, no joy. Applied for the internship and got another interview but opted for big 5 internship which I ultimately didn’t get a job after.... the joys of it!

LawBoy2018

AA247 wrote: »

Agreed if you got rejected from traineeship at interview stage and re-applied for the traineeship, application won’t get through unless you have loads more achieved since then. But if you’re rejected from traineeship and apply for the internship they will still look at your application. Criteria is different for both programmes.

I interviewed for top 10 firm for traineeship couple of years back, no joy. Applied for the internship and got another interview but opted for big 5 internship which I ultimately didn’t get a job after.... the joys of it!

At least you have that experience from a big 5 firm though! The fact that you even got interviews is a good sign. I'm sure you'll be G!

AA247

Also worth noting a lot of the firms automatically screen applications so really you could have the same stuff done as last application that got rejected but if you answer the competency questions better with different examples chance you will score better for an interview.

Not meaning to give advice as I am clearly not in a position to do so ha ha!

Corplawtrainee

Fe179user wrote: »

Hi looking for some advice.

I interviewed with one of the big 5 in March 2020 for their internship programme. I scored 18/20 in the interview meaning I would have been offered a place on their internship programme in normal circumstances. I was offered automatic interview instead for either traineeship or internship programme. I chose a traineeship interview and didn’t get past even the first stage of interviews (group interview is stage one and individual is stage two). I was so disappointed and very upset after this because I felt like I really fit in with this firm and I am desperate for a trainee contract (graduated in 2020 and have passed some FE1s).

Should I apply for their internship to get my foot back in the door with the firm? I am embarrassed to apply (as stupid as that sounds) partly because I’m annoyed that I messed up the last interview and partly because I’m annoyed how they handled those who passed the internship the last time I.e. they should have postponed it until this summer or held it virtually.

Can anyone give me a second opinion on what I should do? I was hoping on getting offered a traineeship following that internship so I would be sorted going into my masters and just get the FE1s done. But now I am so lost and quite worried because I’m almost 23 and have no trainee contract.

I’d apply for the internship again worst thing they can do is reject you. There was a guy I interned with at one of the big 5 that had previously been rejected for a direct TC that same year. So, there’s always a chance they’d give you another shot if it was just the interview on the day that let you down. However, this is a bit more unlikely. Did you get feedback, did they say why they rejected you? At least you could then try to fix those specific weaknesses for next time. It would also be impressive to show that you bounced back from the rejection and did x,y and z as result.

Fe179user

Thank you for your replies guys! The group interview was a case study so my feedback was basically that I hadn’t made enough original points and wasn’t answering prompts efficiently!

I have done quite a bit since my last interview (FE1s, legal experience etc). I just think my confidence is dropped because I was sure I’d get through as I had gotten through the previous interview. Sometimes looking for traineeships is such a hard journey but appreciate all your kind responses!

Diamond_Hands

Fe179user wrote: »

Thank you for your replies guys! The group interview was a case study so my feedback was basically that I hadn’t made enough original points and wasn’t answering prompts efficiently!

I have done quite a bit since my last interview (FE1s, legal experience etc). I just think my confidence is dropped because I was sure I’d get through as I had gotten through the previous interview. Sometimes looking for traineeships is such a hard journey but appreciate all your kind responses!

Is this for Arthur Cox? I got a TC offer with them but rejected it, if you need advice for applying to them, let me know!

Diamond_Hands

How would everyone rank 5 big firms in Ireland in terms of salary, culture, work exposure, rotations, training, work-life balance, etc.?

Fe1forthefun

How long do the A&L assessments take? I had to do other applications over the weekend and didn't get a chance to do them.

Would I get them done during a 1 hour lunch break?

AA247

Fe1forthefun wrote: »

How long do the A&L assessments take? I had to do other applications over the weekend and didn't get a chance to do them.

Would I get them done during a 1 hour lunch break?

Yes 100%, takes about 30 min, 40 max

AA247

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

Is this for Arthur Cox? I got a TC offer with them but rejected it, if you need advice for applying to them, let me know!

Out of curiosity - can I ask why you rejected with TC with AC?

Diamond_Hands

AA247 wrote: »

Out of curiosity - can I ask why you rejected with TC with AC?

I have nothing but good things to say about them, but I accepted an offer with A&L.

AA247

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

I have nothing but good things to say about them, but I accepted an offer with A&L.

Ah fair enough!

Fe179user

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

Is this for Arthur Cox? I got a TC offer with them but rejected it, if you need advice for applying to them, let me know!

Yes it is! Could you send me a message if possible on this?

Corplawtrainee

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

I have nothing but good things to say about them, but I accepted an offer with A&L.

Ok interesting, I was the opposite. Had offers from the same two but took AC instead. I guess it just comes down to the culture and the vibe you get from the firm at stage.

Did you intern at both of them?

HansKroenke

Diamond_Hands wrote: »

How would everyone rank 5 big firms in Ireland in terms of salary, culture, work exposure, rotations, training, work-life balance, etc.?

McCanns and Arthur Cox are the worst in terms of culture. I would strongly advise anyone to not apply to them. It comes from the top down as well. Conservatism and soul destroying hours, not commensurate with the salary is how I would sum them up.

FE1Hopefully1

HansKroenke wrote: »

McCanns and Arthur Cox are the worst in terms of culture. I would storngly advise anyone to not apply to them. It comes from the top down as well. Conservatism and soul destroying hours, not commensurate with the salary is how I would sum them up.

Had a bad experience with the mccanns people at one law fair and never applied to them definitely not somewhere I wanted to be but at the same time my friend interned there and loved them haha

HansKroenke

FE1Hopefully1 wrote: »

Had a bad experience with the mccanns people at one law fair and never applied to them definitely not somewhere I wanted to be but at the same time my friend interned there and loved them haha

What you will find in law is a lot of masochistic personalities. People seem to like the long hours and no life outside of work Monday to Friday, to the point where they accept it as part of life. It is disturbing but there is a personality that takes pleasure in the pain.

Matheson is also quite toxic, particularly with their behaviour in recent months to staff (hint, the day they claimed the office was closed as a mark of respect for a partner that died; people with young kids at home and an all staff mail).

Corplawtrainee

HansKroenke wrote: »

McCanns and Arthur Cox are the worst in terms of culture. I would strongly advise anyone to not apply to them. It comes from the top down as well. Conservatism and soul destroying hours, not commensurate with the salary is how I would sum them up.

Hey,

Just genuinely curious what you’re basing this off? Are you going into corporate law yourself and did you have any personal experience with this?

Like any high pressure profession I imagine that you’ll run into some toxic people, that‘s just expected I guess. But didn’t feel that there was any sort of firm wide cultural issue when I was there. In what way are the firm overly conservative? Can you give any examples?

HansKroenke

Corplawtrainee wrote: »

Hey,

Just genuinely curious what you’re basing this off? Are you going into corporate law yourself and did you have any personal experience with this?

Like any high pressure profession I imagine that you’ll run into some toxic people, that‘s just expected I guess. But didn’t feel that there was any sort of firm wide cultural issue when I was there. In what way are the firm overly conservative? Can you give any examples?

Experience was from friends there as trainees, not directly my own experience. From those that are still working there now, this is my observation of their personalities.

To explain in more detail; McCanns has a very hierarchical structure and is keen to impress it upon trainees. McCanns has quite a strict dress code policy for females despite its outward projection of being strongly into diversity and inclusion. Both AC and McCanns "culture" is to work long hours and it is felt that one cannot make a strong impression as a trainee without doing those hours. The working from home topic has displayed rigid, uncompromising personalities at the top, with a focus to get people in, particularly the junior employees, sooner rather than later. There are personalities that are suited to these firms but corporate law doesn't have to be the kind of style these firms represent.

Diamond_Hands

I mean the stereotype of corporate law is never really false, despite what they tell you at grad fairs.

Corplawtrainee

HansKroenke wrote: »

Experience was from friends there as trainees, not directly my own experience. From those that are still working there now, this is my observation of their personalities.

To explain in more detail; McCanns has a very hierarchical structure and is keen to impress it upon trainees. McCanns has quite a strict dress code policy for females despite its outward projection of being strongly into diversity and inclusion. Both AC and McCanns "culture" is to work long hours and it is felt that one cannot make a strong impression as a trainee without doing those hours. The working from home topic has displayed rigid, uncompromising personalities at the top, with a focus to get people in, particularly the junior employees, sooner rather than later. There are personalities that are suited to these firms but corporate law doesn't have to be the kind of style these firms represent.

Ok fair enough, I can imagine that working quite long hours is common across all top corporate law firms everywhere tbh, especially at the junior end. Although, maybe there is a bit more of a facetime culture at AC, haven’t worked there properly yet so can’t comment on that. And yeah, tbh I would say that there may be a bit more of a strict high performance culture at AC.

Sorry, didn’t really get your second point. Do you mean that they are trying to get junior employees into the office as soon as possible. Tbh, I would personally be for that. You wouldn’t get nearly the same learning experience online. Also, the office environment would definitely be a lot more social.

I think the whole cliche that you have be this aggressive type A personality to be a corporate lawyer and that everyone in your trainee intake is out to get each other is a bit overplayed. Sure, most people are high achievers and there might be a few bad eggs. However, a lot the people in my intake are just really friendly and motivated people who want to do well in life. And the trainees I know in the intakes ahead of me seem to be quite close and look out for each other.

biglawhead420

HansKroenke wrote: »

Experience was from friends there as trainees, not directly my own experience. From those that are still working there now, this is my observation of their personalities.

To explain in more detail; McCanns has a very hierarchical structure and is keen to impress it upon trainees. McCanns has quite a strict dress code policy for females despite its outward projection of being strongly into diversity and inclusion. Both AC and McCanns "culture" is to work long hours and it is felt that one cannot make a strong impression as a trainee without doing those hours. The working from home topic has displayed rigid, uncompromising personalities at the top, with a focus to get people in, particularly the junior employees, sooner rather than later. There are personalities that are suited to these firms but corporate law doesn't have to be the kind of style these firms represent.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that McCann was the least hierarchical of nearly any big firm? A partner that I spoke to explained to me that they are the only firm that doesn't have varying salaries for equity partners based on how much you buy in. Every partner gets a set percent of the firms profits. This would surely seem more egalitarian?

In firms like AC etc you could have some partners on €200,000 while others are on €1,200,000.

They are also a lockstep firm as opposed to one that adopts an eat what you kill approach.

HansKroenke

biglawhead420 wrote: »

Correct me if I am wrong, but I was under the impression that McCann was the least hierarchical of nearly any big firm? A partner that I spoke to explained to me that they are the only firm that doesn't have varying salaries for equity partners based on how much you buy in. Every partner gets a set percent of the firms profits. This would surely seem more egalitarian?

In firms like AC etc you could have some partners on €200,000 while others are on €1,200,000.

They are also a lockstep firm as opposed to one that adopts an eat what you kill approach.

I don't think I can correct you. I have heard of some incidences, perhaps more to do with HR, where trainees felt they were spoken down to and made to feel a bit like schoolchildren.

HansKroenke

Corplawtrainee wrote: »

Ok fair enough, I can imagine that working quite long hours is common across all top corporate law firms everywhere tbh, especially at the junior end. Although, maybe there is a bit more of a facetime culture at AC, haven’t worked there properly yet so can’t comment on that. And yeah, tbh I would say that there may be a bit more of a strict high performance culture at AC.

Sorry, didn’t really get your second point. Do you mean that they are trying to get junior employees into the office as soon as possible. Tbh, I would personally be for that. You wouldn’t get nearly the same learning experience online. Also, the office environment would definitely be a lot more social.

I think the whole cliche that you have be this aggressive type A personality to be a corporate lawyer and that everyone in your trainee intake is out to get each other is a bit overplayed. Sure, most people are high achievers and there might be a few bad eggs. However, a lot the people in my intake are just really friendly and motivated people who want to do well in life. And the trainees I know in the intakes ahead of me seem to be quite close and look out for each other.

On the hours point, for sure it seems to be quite common across big firms but I would limit my definition of "big" to top 6 in respect of the long hours point. But I get the impression that it is not easy to take a stand as a trainee and just work consistently 9am-6pm type hours if your preference was not to do the longer hours that many do.

With the WFH, there was in AC a fumbled policy of trying to put pressure on people to come in but at the same time not forcing them, communicated via email. To me that indicates a lack of trust and a need to control where junior employees are concerned.

In terms of the personality type, for sure the trainees are generally one big group which get on well with each other and would do a lot outside of work together. That is a big benefit to being in a large firm, having a wide group of close connections as a lot of people move on after they qualify so it can be useful to have a contact somewhere else in terms of moving on yourself or even developing client relationships.

Corplawtrainee

HansKroenke wrote: »

On the hours point, for sure it seems to be quite common across big firms but I would limit my definition of "big" to top 6 in respect of the long hours point. But I get the impression that it is not easy to take a stand as a trainee and just work consistently 9am-6pm type hours if your preference was not to do the longer hours that many do.

With the WFH, there was in AC a fumbled policy of trying to put pressure on people to come in but at the same time not forcing them, communicated via email. To me that indicates a lack of trust and a need to control where junior employees are concerned.

In terms of the personality type, for sure the trainees are generally one big group which get on well with each other and would do a lot outside of work together. That is a big benefit to being in a large firm, having a wide group of close connections as a lot of people move on after they qualify so it can be useful to have a contact somewhere else in terms of moving on yourself or even developing client relationships.

I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t think the 9-6 point is realistic. Other trainees don’t work longer because they want to. If you need to close a deal or have a court deadline to meet, you just need to get the work done end off. So, you can’t really say oh no I don’t want to do the same hours as everybody else. But tbh why should you get paid the same as everyone else and not pull your weight, like that’s your job at the end of the day. It’s not going to be crazy hours the whole time, but when it is, you just need to pull in with the rest of your team.

I don’t know enough about the WFH policy to really comment on it. But I think a big concern is that WFH may stunt the development of trainees and junior associates as they don’t have the same exposure to more senior lawyers to receive feedback and ask questions. However, maybe it was a bit controlling and not properly communicated idk.

FE1Nov20

Anyone hear anything more from DAC Beachcroft ?

Fe1123

FE1Nov20 wrote: »

Anyone hear anything more from DAC Beachcroft ?

Nope nothing