Comments on: RPC and Reed Smith post latest trainee retention scores https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/ Legal news, insider insight and careers advice Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:52:20 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6 By: Legal commentator 2 https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195850 Thu, 18 Jul 2024 08:52:20 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195850 In reply to Legal commentator.

Perhaps the incompetent are those who are already qualified and were overhired during the pandemic period should be eliminated – not the up and coming people who are paying the price and deserve a chance as much as anyone else

]]>
By: peeved off trainee standing in solidarity https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195785 Wed, 17 Jul 2024 13:45:22 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195785 In reply to Unretained SC Trainee.

Agree, think the pay war hasn’t helped. In increasing those salaries for NQ’s, they have to leverage salaries for those lawyers higher up the PQE chain. Some firms definition of “increase” isn’t even a proper increase tbqhwy.

That probably gives those disgruntled at 2-7PQE and/or those who have their firms taking a sizeable pound of flesh wanting to lateral as they see the roles that offer them the chance to get more G@!n$ elsewhere.

Hopefully the market will open up soon and some new roles come in soon, mayhaps firms will realise they let too much talent go and then vacancies will open up. A bit idealistic but radical optimism is needed during these times – fingers crossed for us all, godspeed

]]>
By: Legal commentator https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195636 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 23:50:25 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195636 Far too many lawyers in the market. It’s time to keep the good and eliminate the incompetent.

]]>
By: Ed https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195592 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 17:09:40 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195592 In reply to Anon.

It is insightful to know there is a trend among city firms in hiring.

I heard from a friend that the thing happened at DLA Piper. Apparently a few teams didn’t post any NQ roles.

To name a few: Responsible Business (Pro Bono), Real Estate, Intellectual Property, Technology & Sourcing etc.

]]>
By: Cc insider https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195589 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:51:57 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195589 CC apparently 75% amber Heard here first

]]>
By: Reuben https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195579 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 16:18:31 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195579 In reply to Anon.

Which 4 teams posted jobs? Which 6 teams didn’t post jobs?

]]>
By: Anon https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195574 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:47:13 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195574 It’s no surprise that every NQ role was highly competitive at RPC since only 4 teams posted them (out of 10).

]]>
By: Chris https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195573 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:45:15 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195573 Kirkland retention rate was 104%.

]]>
By: BethanyTheBuilder https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195570 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:36:56 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195570 I’m a glass is half full type of person… At least they were given the opportunity to become a solicitor… Would you prefer firms such as BCLP and Reed Smith to give 100 TCs and only offer a small permanent jobs, or only offer a small percentage of TCs from the get go…

A job is not guaranteed in a capitalist society… There are prob plenty NQ jobs around, but London City Law firm Trainees feel they deserve a high salary for what (at their stage) is essentially admin work.

]]>
By: Tré Cool https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195556 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:23:37 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195556 In reply to Dave.

Wake me up when it ends

]]>
By: Employment Associate https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195552 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 13:54:15 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195552 In reply to Tom.

There’s quite a lot of demand in employment lately, especially with the new changes coming under Labour

]]>
By: David https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195549 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 12:59:41 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195549 In reply to Unretained SC Trainee.

Knock on impact of the relentless NQ salary increases, or more importantly, salary bunching above that. For example, for one of the commercial teams at RPC, beyond retaining your own trainees (or at least the best ones), why externally hire an NQ on a £90k salary when you could get a 3PQE for perhaps £10k more?

]]>
By: Engage your brain m8 https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195532 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:56:41 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195532 In reply to Chaz.

“only 8 applied for associate positions”… why do you think that is?

“unfair to blame RS for not retaining three other people who didn’t even want/bother to apply for associate positions”… why do you think the other 3 didn’t apply?

Use your brain. Clearly there were teams that didn’t have the budget to post an NQ role in a department they wanted to qualify into which is why they didn’t apply.

It is not a case of trainees not being bothered to apply – there simply were not enough roles going in the teams trainees were looking to qualify into.

]]>
By: Truth Serum https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195531 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:49:54 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195531 In reply to Chaz.

Nobody is blaming Reed Smith.

Literally, no one.

Read the room (and the comments)… everyone is saying the NQ market is dead. The market is to blame

]]>
By: Anon https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195529 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:44:26 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195529 In reply to Chaz.

Why did they not want to accept an NQ role at the firm, though?

]]>
By: Chaz https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195527 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:30:12 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195527 In reply to 36%?!.

It’s less bad than it looks.

Of the 11 trainees, only 8 applied for associate positions – it’s a bit unfair to blame RS for not retaining three other people who didn’t even want/bother to apply for associate positions.

Of the remaining 8 trainees who applied for associate positions, six were given offers – again, it’s a bit unfair to blame RS for the people within those six who were given an offer and turned it down – from the perspective of a potential trainee, RS offered 6/8 people who applied associate positions.

Ultimately 8 people applied for associate positions at RS. RS made offers to 6 of those 8 (I.e. 75% of applicants received offers – a much healthier figure). Factoring in people made an offer who rejected it completely distorts the numbers particularly from the perspective of a potential trainee (the bulk of the LC readership).

]]>
By: Harry https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195524 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:04:29 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195524 In reply to 36%?!.

Bearing in mind that many of those with offers are qualifying into teams that were not their first choice but for the sake of having a job, the figures are distorted.

The % of retained trainees qualifying into their preferred team is probably around 15% (not just at the firms listed in the article but at all firms across the city).

]]>
By: Tom https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195523 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 09:00:13 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195523 In reply to 36%?!.

My initial assumption is that retention is poor across all firms this year because there isn’t as much demand in the specialist areas i.e Employment, Pensions, Privacy, Intellectual Property etc

This may be linked to M&A activity being down and corporate being dead.

]]>
By: Unretained SC Trainee https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195522 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:40:40 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195522 In reply to No Money No NQs.

Anyone else without an offer noticing that there are hardly any roles externally solely aimed at NQs?

I keep being told that the roles are going to those with the most experience.

]]>
By: Kirkland NQ https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195521 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:39:55 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195521 In reply to Ding Dong the NQ Market is Gone.

I would love to reply, but been so busy buying my holiday home on the Côte d’Azur.

]]>
By: Jay https://www.legalcheek.com/2024/07/rpc-and-reed-smith-post-latest-trainee-retention-scores/#comment-1195520 Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:36:19 +0000 https://www.legalcheek.com/?p=206963#comment-1195520 In reply to No Money No NQs.

I think you mean Mo Money No NQs hahaha

]]>