Corporate was the only group where people didn’t get offers

Not slaughters but generally all practice areas were oversubscribed.

Corporate is always oversubscribed across city firms but this time especially given the reduced number of positions.

Finance seems to be buoyant but from what I’ve heard they also have tightened their hiring budgets as it has been oversubscribed for not as many roles going this time.

The real killer this cycle is the niche practice areas which includes your employment, intellectual property, tax, data protection, insurance, pensions, technology and sourcing etc.

There are little to no roles going at NQ level in those areas and if there are roles there are over 100 applicants.

This is BS

From what I can gather, its more about “fit” not so much that the trainee did anything egregious (i.e trainee not as social etc etc).

The Gold-Plated Circle

Thanks Captain Obvious!

Which groups at SM were oversubscribed/undersubscribed?

1. My E-toro account performs better than the FTSE 100 companies. FTSE 100 clients are mainly old-world companies in the banking (the worst investments), tobacco, oil and mining sectors or dinosaurs like BT, Royal Mail etc. that no one cares about.

2. Your pitch of Slaughter’s culture is that of indentured servitude, reeeaaalll attractive.

3. 15 years for partnership? You’re more likely to be “up or out” after 10 years.

You all need to understand that Slaughter and May’s multi-specialist approach and unique market strengths – including advising more FTSE 100 companies than any other firm and its long history as a market leader – means it needs to make tough choices in regards to retention.

Slaughter’s only takes and keeps the best of the best – those who are willing to truly serve clients in an excellent manner. Any trainees who have complained about the lack of a raise or else have not embraced the firm’s multi-specialist mindset, commitment to quality of service, and unique approach to billing clearly do not fit into Slaughter’s culture and are not viable long-term candidates for firm partnership. After all, if they cannot make sacrifices for the firm now, what will they be like 15 years down the line when they’re considered for partnership?

Ergo, many of them have been kept on fixed-term contracts – and it will be clear soon whether they sink or swim.

I think you mean the Prestige Circle…

At a super-hierarchical firm like Slaughters, I imagine internal politics and your “polish” as a trainee plays a big part…

Usually around 6 months. The claim is that the period will iron out any “performance issues” / uncertainty they have about trainees before bringing them on full-time as associates. Unless the market picks up though, I can see a lot of these FTCs lapsing…

BEGGARS BELIEF !!!

I would be keen to scope how much internal politics has influenced FTC/perm gigs and/or being given a role on qualification or not.

I am not sure some who qualify are really talented or even a safe pair of hands, at some firms it truly seems to be whether you are palatable or not

wondering what is happening at the US firms …

How long are the FTCs? Are they there to genuinely give them a chance / see if the market picks up or is the message that they won’t be kept on after the end so they should look for jobs (but still boost the retention rate)?

Because the MC was never defined in terms of salary or international presence…?

That’s enough salary comparison now freshers. Vac scheme applications will be back soon and it’s nearly your turn to apply.

Yep.

Also that those with offers are not all qualifying into the teams they wanted albeit this seems to be happening at all firms this NQ cycle.

At least 7 of the retained are on FTCs, rumours are that it’s actually 10. It’s beyond me that someone has confirmed that all are on permanent deals – it’s demonstrably false.

Slaughter and May is Platinum Circle. It is the only firm in the Platinum Circle.