In association with
Published: 07/04/2008 11:53
Email article | Comment on this article | Sign up to News Alerts
Click 'Comment on this article' to post your advice in confidence - or click here to share your wisdom on the Legal Week Wiki, where no topic is off limits. Rate or slate your firm and its rivals with our ground-breaking insider's guide to City law.
And remember, Career Clinic is only as good as the questions we receive, so email your career conundrums to community@legalweek.com.
I am also an ethnic minority lawyer from a non-privileged background - I work at Clifford Chance and believe them to be very supportive of diversity. If you haven't had luck with them just keep making the applications and stay positive when you get interviewed - these things are a lot more about luck than the firms make out. It's a question of plugging away without becoming disillusioned. Maybe ask someone to review an application that was unsuccessful - a second opinion can be a great help.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
Have you considered it may not be quite so much about your ethnic background but about how you come across at interview?
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
As long as you’re privileged and have the benefits of a privileged education, being from an ethnic minority is no barrier to a career in law – quite the reverse. If you’re not from a privileged background, it’s a problem unless you have academic virtuosity of such startling brilliance that you can overcome the educational apartheid that exists in this country. Given the state of schooling in most of the non-privileged parts of the country, that is a Herculean task. But once completed you have merely to overcome lack of connections to guide you along your path and feelings of social awkwardness and alienation. In this respect, a driven attitude, Cary Grant-standard charm, a thick skin and well above average physical attractiveness should do the trick. Apart from all that, it’s a total meritocracy.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
Dewey & LeBoeuf is good in terms of its ethnic diversity.
Posted by: Dewey & LeBoeuf associate on 07 Apr 2008
I can really relate to your comments. I am from a non-privileged background, fought my way to find myself into a top 5 university, completed a postgraduate course and the LPC. But I still can't find a training contract. I am not well connected but I have worked extremely hard to get where I am today. Harder than some of my counterparts who "Daddy" paved the way for!! I think that being from an ethnic minority background is a disadvantage especially at Magic Circle firms, which think having brown hair is diversity! My school didn't have psychometric tests, am I to be denied a career in the law because I am no good at psychometric tests? or because I don't play rugby or tennis?
Posted by: Student on 07 Apr 2008
I am White, male and heterosexual, so as privileged as you can be according to what you hear from politicians and journalists these days. I found it extremely hard to secure a job in the City, and I agree that to a large extent it's down to luck. Some people have the perfect CV and get many offers, others just have to be very persistent.
Posted by: Associate (US firm) on 07 Apr 2008
'If you’re not from a privileged background, it’s a problem unless you have academic virtuosity of such startling brilliance that you can overcome the educational apartheid that exists in this country.' What a load of complete and utter rubbish. If you've got the right qualities in terms of qualifications (A-Levels and Degree), and have the right characterstics to make a good lawyer (this is something they will be probing in your interview), then educational background and skin colour are totally and utterly irrelevant at the vast majority of law firms in the UK. I am a case in point. The poster who stated the above needs to wake up, stop playing the race card, and realise that his/her difficulties to-date most likely result from him/her not having the necessary qualifications and/or skills to become a good lawyer, and has nothing to do with skin colour and/or whether he/she went to a state school etc.
Posted by: Corporate Associate on 07 Apr 2008
It is unfortunate that diversity is still a major issue in the 21st century legal marketplace. Some firms such as Herbert Smith, Denton Wilde Sapte and Allen & Overy are outwardly tackling it, while others simply use this as a marketing ploy to satisfy quotas, yet their workforce is not representative of this. Having gone to a top university, done an LLM and could tick every box of 'what we are looking for', I still struggled to secure a training contract after 10 interviews with top firms. I disagree with the post suggesting it is ALL about interview technique, rather I think a lot of the law firms are looking for a type of person, someone who they feel they can put in front of a client. So, if you don't speak 3 languages or look a certain way, chances are you'll struggle to bag a TC. Then again, for me it boiled down to sheer luck, with one 'diversity focused' firm recognising my potential. My advice to you is press on and don't give up!
Posted by: Future Trainee on 07 Apr 2008
BLP welcomes applications from well qualified candidates from all backgrounds. Good academics are important, but I believe that some allowances can be made if a candidate has faced particular challenges. It is obviously easier to get top grades in exams if you have had the benefit of an expensive education, and this is recognised. Please don't give up with your applications.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
I would agree with the poster above - do try CC if you have not already. I am comprehensive school-educated and came at law from a slightly different angle (via a flirtation with journalism). At interview they approached my background very positively - certainly not my experience with other some other firms.
Posted by: Clifford Chance, future trainee on 07 Apr 2008
To Corporate Associate, the poster in question is white so it's rather unlikely that I'm 'playing the race card'. As to your claims that privilege makes no difference, that is so ridiculous as to be laughable. Every serious academic study that has been done on education, career prospects and social mobility in the last 20 years in Western economies comes to exactly the same conclusion: those from privileged backgrounds are far, far more likely to do well in school and careers for reasons to do with educational opportunity, social networks and the prejudices of those hiring rather than innate intellectual ability. Even if you are a ‘case in point’, and in my experience of law there are very few of those, so what? The exception doesn’t disprove the rule. Actually it often ends up being used to justify it.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
As long as 10 years ago, the firm I worked for actively sought a diverse range of applicants, example being the delight of the recruiting partner on getting an application from an Asian female with a degree from a former polytechnic! However, while this worked in favour of her getting an interview, her offer of a training place would not have been made if she had not delivered an excellent and persuasive interview performance. The fact is, most audiences do have a mental image of who they are looking for (gender, age, background etc) even if they can't admit it, but this doesn't mean that you will never be that person. Read the firm's stated recruitment literature to spot which firms give greatest emphasis to diversity, and whether there is visible evidence in the proportion of female/non-white partners (it's rather harder to identify gender orientation/social background diversity, but you could ask about this as they should have statistics). This might enable you to focus your efforts on the audience best suited to you.
Posted by: In-house lawyer on 07 Apr 2008
'Every serious academic study.....comes to exactly the same conclusion: those from privileged backgrounds are far, far more likely to do well in school and careers.'. Yes, I agree with you - as a matter of fact those who have had the opportunity to get into (or be sent to) a good school, university etc, are statistically more likely to suceed in the long run. However, your initial post suggested/implied (e.g. by the use of the words 'educational apartheid') that Joe Bloggs with 2 As and a B at A-Level, and a 2:1 from a decent redbrick, would find it difficult to get a training contact just because he is from a working-class background, or because he didn't go to public school. If I mis-understood your original post, then apologies.
Posted by: Corporate Associate on 07 Apr 2008
It means that the biggest impact of privilege/class etc is in educational opportunities, which then go on to have massive impact on your academics and career opportunities. It’s a demonstrable, statistical fact that those will access to excellent schooling do far better on average than intellectual equivalents with little option but to go to poor schools in deprived areas. To talk about academics after that point, misses the point. The impact of privilege has already happened. From that point on the effect gets reflected and magnified by the career track.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
In my opinion it does not matter whether you are from an ethnic minority to succeed in the City or any other top area in business. What, however, matters is the "social background" of your parents, family. The persons who decide on an application are in their majority from the upper classes. They tend to favour someone who can behave like them and speak their "language". They are looking for someone who has the same features, characteristics and taste as they have. I guess, the son of a black diplomat from Ghana will do better than a white girl from a working class family who states that she likes Premier League Football.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
Student: I too am non-priviledged without contacts, but I only went to a top 20 uni and didn't do a postgrad. Yet I managed to get a training contract with a top 15 firm. I also worked at a MC firm, who seemed to have a majority of non-English/white/priviledged lawyers in the department. For diversity, CC and A&O are good and AG has been in the press a fair bit recently.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
"to talk about academics after that point, misses the point. The impact of privilege has already happened.". Agreed. But the original question-asker has already got past such academic hurdles. Therefore what is the relevance of your original comment (to the effect that 'if you're not from a privileged background, it's a problem') if not to suggest that the type of school attended and/or social class/background etc will in themselves have an impact on employability?
Posted by: Corporate Associate on 07 Apr 2008
Future trainee: do you really think that English lawyers speak three languages? Get in a Firm and see what you will really find.
Posted on: 07 Apr 2008
To Corporate Associate, for someone who’s trying to argue with me you seem to keep agreeing. The relevance is two things: the poster was asking about their chances, so I told him the lay of the land. The second point is to debate these issues. Added to which, ‘excellent’ academics tends to not mean the same thing if you're from a non-privileged background. You will look at your peer group, think you’re top 2-5% and think, quite justifiably, that shows you are pretty good. But when those results are taken out of context, against those who are educationally privileged, you will look much worse. Most recruiters won’t adjust for social economic background, so you’ll get marked down for doing ever so slightly worse than those who had the opportunity of top-flight schooling. Added to which, there’s the second part of my original post: ‘you have merely to overcome lack of connections to guide you along your path and feelings of social awkwardness and alienation’. I’ve nothing against those from privileged backgrounds using what they’ve got - of course you will, that's life. But let’s not insult everyone’s intelligence by pretending the playing field is level.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
I feel psychometric tests alone are a means of discriminating against ethnic minority candidates, designed specifically for that very purpose. I have great grades coupled with experience, yet each time i finish with a psychometric test, i'm apparently told that i fell "below avergae". I agree with the poster who speaks of Law firms striving to recruit a particular personality, (which disregards talent), and really just benefits those able to fit the "team", whatever that might be... (discrimination in disguise!) I don't think anyone can doubt my committment, intellectual ability, and drive, yet why am i constantly being knocked. Most people admit that Law firms are targetting a particular personality, which i obviously fall foul of. Nevertheless, i continue to struggle on...
Posted by: S on 08 Apr 2008
To Corporate Associate: It's called sarcasm
Posted by: Future Trainee on 08 Apr 2008
The problem is not being an ethnic minority but which ethnic groups you fall under. I assure you that most firms consider diversity quotas filled by Asian ethnic minorities. I can count the number of black (Caribbean or African) fee earners on one hand at my Top 10 firm. The majority of black people are still in support roles (or employed as PAs or cleaners). Sad but very true. I have been taken for a PA so many times it's no longer funny. Race does exist as an issue in the City. I wish it were a card I could play but unfortunately I don't consider my career a game.
Posted by: EM NQ on 08 Apr 2008
To EM: This is such a sad fact but very true. People still think Oxbridge is a beneficial factor for getting into the City firms. However, EVEN black Oxbridge students have struggled to bag a TC! So all of you banging on about privilege et al.. this proves, it makes no difference! This is why American firms are a more attractive option because they appear to take diversity more seriously than their British counterparts. I have numerous black friends in American law firms, and they certainly aren't PA's or secretaries. English law firms need to fix up quickly or loose out on all the talent heading to the US firms!!
Posted by: B- Future Trainee on 08 Apr 2008
I agree that diversity is a challenge that firms have not yet risen to. I also agree that people who are ethnically Chinese or Indian (although still under-represented among the partner ranks) are faring better than people of African ethnicity, who are represented in law firms mainly in catering, cleaning and security. The boom in legal services over the past few years has led to the larger law firms searching more widely for legal talent (notably in the Hong Kong, Singapore and Indian markets) have of necessity started to recruit a lot more ethnic minority lawyers and I sincerely hope that from this pool we will see a much higher incidence of promotions to partner than we have seen historically. We all have a long way to go in making our workplaces truly meritocratic, despite often having the best of intentions. Not all firms are the same. My firm is unusual in having black partners (made partner on merit) as well as other more familiar ethnic minority faces among the partnership, and I hope that the partnership will continue to become more representative since the pool of talented lawyers from which we promote is becoming more diverse.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
To the initial question as to organisations that can help; try RARE and SEO. They are really proactive in helping minorities secure placements. They help with interview technique, and liaise with the firms to get you at least an interview. Good Luck, I know its frustruating, but I've been there! Just persist and you'll get in there soon enough!!
Posted by: Helper on 08 Apr 2008
SEO only helps 2nd year law students, so I think that you will be in a catch 22 situation there. Also, if we are talking about race, let’s get straight! There are hardly any Afro-Caribbean and Chinese (British) students that have training contracts why that is? There are a number of Indian and African students with training contracts, but then again most African and Indian students who have training contracts went to Oxbridge or an expensive grammar school!! So law firms are bound to take them! It is a known fact that Afro-Caribbean and Chinese (British) students are not well represented in the City and especially at law firms. Things need to change!
Posted by: NQ on 08 Apr 2008
People from African ethnicity are not represented as cleaners, catering and security staff in law firms. If you look at the statistics there are more African trainees, associates and partners then there are Afro-Caribbean. Afro-Caribbean students are under represented in the City and especially in law firms, investment banking and accountancy. They aren't even given the chance to get that catering, PA, cleaning or security job!
Posted by: Anon on 08 Apr 2008
Student: I doubt many schools practise pyschometric testing (or universities for that matter). Some people do well without the practice, so could it be that these tests measure something other than the ability to work hard and learn by rote? I don't mean to sound harsh, but judging by the number of straight-A graduates with good degrees etc who can barely tie their own shoelaces, let alone demonstrate a talent for the practice of law, I do not think that academic grades are a particularly reliable indicator of talent for the practice of law. Similarly, other skills are essential, so grades are often only a means to getting an interview. Once there, these other skills are tested, so it may be that you need to work on these if you are getting to interview by no further (as you say, your intellectual ability is beyond question(!)). If you're not making it to interview, perhaps the rest of your application is not commensurate with your grades? On another note, I struggle to reconcile some of the comments made above with the concerted diversity push being made by many firms in light of the demands of clients to see ethnic diversity in their legal advisors (some now ask for diversity figures). Certainly some firms are actively seeking candidates from ethnic minorities.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
I read the comments on this page with interest. I'm also from a non-privileged background and had to work against the odds to secure high grades. I agree with the various posts that achieving a 'comparable' CV to someone from a privileged background requires a disproportionately higher amount of effort and perhaps in some cases even academic ability. But I can't help but question whether it is really a law firm's responsibility to correct the imbalance, or even whether they have the proper capacity to do so. The kind of 'resources' and corresponding opportunities (both educational and extra-curricular) available to those who are privileged creates a relative gap so huge that no law firm could 'bridge' it without (I think) discriminating against the privileged. This cannot be a way forward: after all, those from an underprivileged background who do succeed will be able to provide a privileged upbringing for their own children and presumably not want to see them discriminated against. Social mobility is a problem that can only properly be addressed at state level. Whilst it's really important that firms continue to pursue diversity and should place more emphasis on the interviewee sitting in front of them rather than the arbitrary grades they've received in exams, no policy they adopt will address the underlying problem which is that life isn't fair. Psychometric tests were probably originally introduced as a means of recruiting without discriminating on the basis of finely distinguishable grades which reflect how good the school was rather than the candidate. However, as with all things, students can be coached and those with the money will pay to learn how to achieve better grades on the tests. Throughout my studies I've met some people who are excessively negative about the fact that it's harder for them than for everyone else. I'm not suggesting that this is true of any of the people who have made comments on this page but it is an easy trap to fall into. Attributing failure to achieve a goal to a factor over which you have no control is always appealing but isn't usually very helpful. My advice to those from underprivileged backgrounds is to understand that no profession in this country operates on a level playing field and if you want to achieve something without rich parents and connections you'll have to do it on your own steam. You'll also have the difficult task of being realistic and taking an objective look at your abilities relative to the competition. Law firms should look for potential in a candidate but they need something to start with, for those who are borderline it may be the case that in a different life with all the help in the world you could have been coached into suitable candidate, but if you haven't done well enough on your own to make it a viable option for a firm to chose you over another candidate to train, you can't expect them to do so, harsh as that sounds. In terms of practical advice, try and get feedback from the places you've been rejected from. You write that you have excellent grades, perhaps this is illuminating: so what? Every candidate has excellent grades, that is the minimum, what else have you done? It's really difficult if you have to earn money and work to finance your studies, study hard enough for excellent grades and still find time to do the other kind of extra curricular stuff (legal and non-legal) to make you an attractive candidate to a firm. Take an objective look at your CV and ask yourself if it's good enough. If it's not, ask yourself what you can do to improve it and if you really want to. The one thing you shouldn't do is look for excuses: if you're right and the places you've applied to are prejudiced then there is little you can do to change them and in any event it wouldn't be pleasant working there. If you're getting rejected from everywhere, even firms which are known to value diversity, then perhaps you should consider whether your goals are realistic: many excellent candidates fail to get a training contract, it's competitive.
Posted by: PG Student on 08 Apr 2008
I can also relate to the comments addressing the dearth of black ethnic minorities at City firms. I participated in a summer scheme with a top City firm that didn't have a single black ethnic minority fee-earner. Not one. No partners. No assistants. No trainees. Several support staff. One can reasonably make the argument that the proportion of black ethnic minorities will be lower due to the proportion of black ethnic candidates compared to the entire applicant pool - and I am strongly against quotas or diversity for diversity's sake - but not a SINGLE black fee-earner??? Needless to say, I didn't take their offer.
Posted by: Future MC Trainee on 08 Apr 2008
PG Student: Whilst it is not the job of law firms to address issues of social mobility it is the duty of all of us to ensure that we act in a fair and transparent manner and to give due consideration to all applicants. We also owe it to all our employees to support them and to develop them, whatever the capacity in which they work (these days around half the staff in law firms are not lawyers, after all). By being accessible to people of all backgrounds firms will be able to tap a larger pool of talent, and by hiring from a more diverse base we will gain the insights of people with a broader range of experiences and skills which, given the way that the world is developing, will mirror those of our clients. I am not suggesting that we need to take candidates from ethnic minorities regardless of their academic qualifications, interviewing skills etc. but rather that we ensure that we give all candidates a fair crack (and this includes people with disabilities, older people, and people from less privileged white backgrounds who haven't enjoyed the kind of mentoring that middle-class families provide). We need to ensure that stereotypical views about what a lawyer looks like don't influence our decisions on recruitment or promotion. The fact is that most hiring decisions are made by partners and most partners are white, male and middle-class. There is a natural tendency for these white, male, middle-class partners to recruit in their own image and this is something that we need to consciously avoid. It is not enough to say that race or gender or sexual orientation shouldn't be a factor in recruitment - we need to acknowledge that it is an issue and to make a conscious effort to be fair.
Posted by: City Partner on 08 Apr 2008
City Partner: I completely agree with you and in no way was suggesting that there isn't a lot that firms should be doing. In particular during my own limited experience, I have found that my friends at law school who come from very privileged backgrounds often lack an appreciation of the difficulties that the underprivileged face and that some of their counterparts in the City may perhaps be less apt at identifying excellent candidates who don't fit the prescribed mould (as you identified). I find it encouraging that there are people in your position who appreciate and act upon this, not purely to help the disadvantaged but because they appreciate that there is a huge deal a firm and the profession can get from doing so. I've no doubt that I owe my own training contract in part to partners who read my application in more than a formalistic manner. My closing comments weren't intended to discourage, and I sincerely hope they don't but as your views evidence, I am not being naïve in thinking that there are people in the city who take a better approach to recruitment. If somebody, having applied everywhere has no luck then I do not think it bad advice that their first step should be to review their application. I think there are two distinct questions here and perhaps I conflated them in my last post: what can partners do and what can students do? - there are the things that people in your position should, and are doing, but at the stage we are in our career, the only way we can effect the shape of the future legal profession is by getting into it. Attributing lack of success to prejudices (which may or may not have been a factor) will not increase an individual's chances of success.
Posted by: PG Student on 08 Apr 2008
If this is a debate on which ethnic background is most under-reprsented, then i'd have to disagree with the poster who says black people are more under represented than the indians or chinese. Pakistanis and Bengalis are far far less represented then the Indians (who you perhaps equated). A lot of it is down to the type of culture the firms are seeking to adopt.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
There is no doubt that diversity (or lack of it) is a major problem in law firms. However, I doubt there is a firm out there that wouldn't say they take diversity seriously. Equally, even if there are a disproportionate number of privately educated fee earners in law firms compared to the general population, few firms would admit to it being an active factor in recruitment. What is not clear from your posting is whether you have any specific evidence to suggest that it is either your em background or the school you attended which are preventing you getting a job. If you do not, can you be absolutely sure that it is this stopping you from getting a tc? If you are not getting to interview stage, ask a third party to review your CV; if you are getting interviews but no further, have you got feedback on those interviews? Remember, excellent academics do not guarantee you an offer.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
To PG Student: with regard to the candidates I interview, I can say that I am generally extremely impressed when people have worked alongside studying as it is no small feat, and when coupled with good grades shows an ability to work hard and be organised that will stand the future employee in good stead. I don't think I would be too disheartened if they haven't done a stint in the pro bono legal field or similar extra-curric activity, provided they can still demonstrate an interest in legal practice.
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
I used to do a great deal of graduate interviews at my last (US) firm and I can assure you that ethnicity really didn't come into whether or not someone was offered a training contract or vac scheme. What counted was your form and how you came across at interview. The reality is that getting a good job in the City is pretty tough. You need persistence and luck to land the best roles. When I changed firms a couple of years ago I applied to and interviewed at a great many places before I received some offers, despite have a very solid CV and a few years at a US firm under my belt. If you tell yourself it's your ethnicity that is the problem and go into interviews this in mind, this is likely to negatively impact your performance as you'll be focusing on this. Walk around Bank or Canary Wharf at lunchtime and you will see every skin colour under the sun and hear dozens of languages. Whilst I am sure there are still rascists in the City, they don't seem to have much of an impact these days. Good luck.
Posted by: Associate, US firm on 08 Apr 2008
As a minority, black and woman so two strikes, I recall when I first came out of uni bright-eyed and bushy-tailed with my Kings 2:1 thinking the world was my oyster. After a few rejections, I was reduced to tears and I recall telling my dad it just isn't fair. I recall his advice with absolute clarity, despite the fact that its been more than ten years. "The world is not a fair place. The fact that some people are born into a privileged world and you have not is something you have absolutely no control over. What you do have control over is what you do with the cards you have. You can waste your time crying and being bitter about what you don't have or make the best use of what you do have. To my mind you have two choices - either marry or work, and I didn't spend all that money on a law degree for you to be a housewife so I suggest you dry your tears and decide your next move." With that advice I went back out there took the hits, the lessons and got on with things. Have I been discriminated against? Yes... and I'm better for it. I was the only black person at my firm a year ago and today we have a black trainee (Nigerian at that). Fairly soon there will be more. We can't all be the Obamas but we can be the Jesse Jacksons. By that I mean, even if we don't all become partners in the top City firms, if we keep trying eventually we will break the ceiling. Sitting and moping about how unfair it is accomplishes nothing and I can assure you there are very few white, middle-class, male Oxbridge partners who are going to grant you any favours. That's life. Deal with it and move on.
Posted by: Afro Caribbean black woman on 08 Apr 2008
To the poster who thinks this is a debate about which ethnicity is most under-represented: it appears you think it is unacceptable to place Indians, Bengalis and Pakistanis in a single ethnic group for the purpose of diversity, but don't seem to have a problem suggesting that 'black people' constitute a single ethnic minority. I'm not making any value judgement on this, I'm just curious as to your rationale?
Posted on: 08 Apr 2008
Much of the debate seems to have ignored the original request for information about organisations which can help with internships etc. I think one of the most effective organisations helping black and minority ethnic students and TC applicants is the Black Lawyers Directory: www.onlinebld.com. It is supported by many City firms (e.g. DLA Piper, A&O, Lovells and Olswang) and regularly hosts excellent networking events and workshops. In addition, through its annual publication of "Black Letter Law" and its featured "Lawyer of the Month" on its website, it celebrates the successes of black and minority ethnic lawyers in the UK. My belief is that those successes give the lie to the general impression that it is all doom and gloom for black and minority ethnic lawyers.
Posted by: Black Partner in City firm on 08 Apr 2008
Most firms like AG, Eversheds and A&O are quite good in this area. I recall my lil' niece (aged 12 at the time) saying to me whilst we strolled around the square mile during her half-term break: Uncle, where are all the black people?’ I was shocked and embarrassed that even at her age she was aware of the inequalities in our society. Although securing a TC is tough and will get tougher (with students getting more As and A*s in their A-levels exams resulting in top red-brick universities), it is not IMPOSSIBLE to secure a TC. I agree with Afro Caribbean Black Woman, the world is not a fair place. Nonetheless, with perseverance it is possible to pierce the supposed glass ceiling. This is where organisations such as the Black Lawyers Directory (www.Onlinebld.com) are very useful. I encourage applicants to access these organisations, attend networking events and do some work experience/vac schemes/open days etc. I believe it has to do with being strategic (there’s no point in submitting 100 application forms) and making an impression. I did all these and subsequently secured a TC with a top 15 firm. It’s not easy but it is POSSIBLE.
Posted by: Black African Future Trainee on 09 Apr 2008
It's demoralising, although some black (with all the variations)/ethnic minority do get through, most don't. Statistics prove it. Most people on the LPC are ethnic minority students, yet only 18% of those manage to get TC's. It's a sad but true story.
Posted on: 09 Apr 2008
To the person interested in my rationale on the ethnicity debate, it's simple. If you refer to 'Indian' students, you are specifying an ethnicity. Whereas when you use terms like: black/ ethnic minority/south asian, you are not alluding to people from a specific country.
Posted on: 09 Apr 2008
In response to your rationale: I'm still not sure I understand, maybe I'm slow. I thought ethnicity specifies someone's race, (a question of genetics?), whereas nationality specifies someone's country, obviously the two interact some countries have many ethnicities and some ethnicities are found in many countries. As far as I understand the common usage of 'black' in the context of diversity statistics is that it is intended to include people of various nationalities and races who all have a common feature. Presumably this is because the point of diversity statistics is to promote diversity and ensure there is no discrimination. Since the majority of lawyers in the city are white middle-class males, the concern is that other ethnic minorities will be discriminated against. The likelihood is that if a white male happens to be discriminatory, he is unlikely to differentiate different races or nationalities within the ethnic group often refered to as 'black people', notwithstanding that the term 'black people' is artificial in the sense that it is not necessarily an accurate label for the many nationalities and cultures that are to be found within that group. The same can be said of other labels which may (correctly or incorrectly) be used to class together people who are of different races and nationalities into a single ethnic group for the purpose of statistics. Again, if a white male is predisposed to discrimination I doubt they would discriminate on the grounds that someone is Bengali rather than Pakistani.
Posted on: 09 Apr 2008
Let’s not get embroiled in this pedantic affair. I’m sure we’re all competent enough to make the relevant distinctions, after all this IS the 21st Century. It’s just a real shame the City law firms haven’t stepped up to the mark by embracing multi-culturalism with open arms. Law firms should embrace and relish diversity, and the differing personalities of these people. In fact, I’d go so far as saying they should use vac schemes/ internships to actively assist those students hard done by, to give them an opportunity to shine (without using the “we’re not a charity, we’re a business” remark).
Posted on: 09 Apr 2008
This discusssion has made it's way onto the front page of the FT!!!!! about time people wake up and recongnise that Diversity is something to be embraced. It is a big problem in this country!
Posted on: 09 Apr 2008
To the OP: I can totally understand where you are coming from with the post. Please be persistent in your search for a training contract: it is natural that you will suffer knock-backs especially in the early stages of applying. This is a time in which to hone your application technique and seek assistance from external sources – which you are clearly doing! Many potential sources have already been mentioned (SEO, the Black Lawyers Directory, the Social Mobility Foundation, RARE). Another source of potential help with an application is The Windsor Fellowship. They have specialised programmes for BME students at varying junctures in their academic/professional lives. If you find that these programmes are unsuitable, or that you are ineligible for them, or more practically that they do not help you in the short term – feel free to ring them. The same advice goes for Capital Chances. Being proactive and remaining positive are two things which will aid your search for a TC. In regards to your question as to which firms “seriously” engage the concept of diversity, this is the more difficult question to answer. What I will say is that several firms have, perhaps undeservedly, acquired a reputation as not being particularly diverse. Do not let your preconceptions of firms colour your opinion of their recruitment policies. Try to submit as many applications as you can, because obtaining a TC is statistically an uphill struggle for all candidates regardless of their ethnicity. To engage with the wider debate that is raging at present on this thread, mention has been made of what I would term the precondition of agglomeration: that is, selecting a firm based on how many black faces are [or you perceive to be] in the office. To loosely paraphrase some of the observations made thus far “I walked my son through the city and saw no black faces/The only blacks in the office were the cleaners/They aren't even given the chance to get that catering, PA, cleaning or security job!”- from a progression perspective, these approaches are not helpful – although I can understand why these sentiments are being aired. I think that the only way to overcome the underrepresentation of BME candidates in the top law firms where in some cases, the condition of underrepresentation may be the prevalent one, is to put your name forward for interview. The danger with branding certain firms as “diverse” and others the antithesis, is that the status-quo will persist; as recruiters at those firms which are perceived as not having (m)any BME staff will struggle to get applicants. You have to deal with being the only black fee-earner in the office, or otherwise how will the situation change? At least you’re not the only black guy driving the bus through 1950s Central London as some of our forefathers were. And besides, it doesn’t necessarily follow that because a firm does not have many black faces in the office, that it is not actively looking to recruit them. There is an emerging disconnect between people’s perceptions of firms and their recruitment agendas (many of which have had to become, prima facie, more positive towards diversity) and the reality that not many BME people are applying; or, as has been alluded to on this thread, BME candidates applying, getting knockbacks and then forming a negative view of the recruitment process. The recruitment agenda is continually evolving and improving. I have deliberately avoided the placement of certain firms in the bracket of “non-diversity-embracing recruiters”. However, I do feel the need to mention US law firms as being very progressive in their approach to diversity. Also, bear in mind the fact that rapid demographic change is occurring in many legal markets in the UK (of which London is not the only one), which will be reflected in their business communities at large; law firms are the lapdogs of companies; and thus it could be contended that it is companies that dictate the pace of change in law firms. This is evidenced by the requirement for panel diversity statistics in transactions between law firms and major banks. To try and knit everything together, try not to be disheartened at the current state of play. Look to the support networks that have been identified and be persistent. Remember that the hurdles won’t suddenly disappear when you actually get the job and that you have to be in it for the long haul: the rough and the smooth. You are already in a more privileged position than you may consider yourself to be in, simply by virtue of being in a small catchment of BME students who are submitting applications for TCs. Good luck in finding a TC and if you want any reassurance as to how bad things can be, and yet how these seemingly insurmountable challenges can be overcome – read Constance Briscoe’s book!
Posted by: Future Trainee on 09 Apr 2008
Last summer, I applied for a training contract. Despite having in hand two very good degrees (and on the way to completing a third) plus 15+ years of business experience working with major multimationals, I am almost certain that many of my applications were thrown in the rubbish bin due to one or more of the following reasons (a) my age - 40 - which could be easily calculated based on a requirement to include the dates when I completed my O/A levels, (b) my degrees were completed at non-Oxbridge universities, and (c) my ethnic background which could be deciphered from my name or other information captured in the application forms. (The fact that I am also gay was not an obvious filter unless the firms who asked for this information did not respect its confidentiality). I had very mixed experiences during the interview phase of the process and, if it wasn't simply for sheer tenacity I would have given up. Although battle scarred and shaken, I do have in hand now a (precious) training contract. I too would like the profession to change and I will do my bit, gently, from within.
Posted by: SN on 09 Apr 2008
I've had so many rejections, i can't help but think that may be there is something wrong with me? Do they not feel i am able enough to represent their clients? I've undertaken numerous months longs voluntary placements at small firms to develop any skills that i may lack, who affirm my exceptional productivity and committment, yet continue to abuse the whole voluntary placement process. What more do i have to do to get a TC? Attend all the firm parties and dance on the table tops, and "get with it"? talk primarily "for the sake of it"? I plod on in my quest, but the light at the end of the tunnel is dim, there are only so many interview rejections you can be imune to. It's a personally thing, perhaps i just don't "fit in" with the culture.
Posted by: On a quest to find a TC on 10 Apr 2008
whilst not everybody secures training contracts, if you speak to people who have one, you'll be hard pushed to find anyone who didn't have a plethora of rejections. You can't infer that getting rejections means you're not good enough since it would also mean that most trainees aren't good enough either!
Posted on: 10 Apr 2008
As the first poster to this thread, I'd like to point out that though I have had strong academic results, I don't have an Oxbridge degree. I don't think there is much racism in the usual sense in the City. What there is, is a tendency to amongst people in senior positions to recruit in their own image (largely for social reasons it seems) - and most of them are middle-class white men. There is also the fact that in my experience people from privileged backgrounds carry themselves in a more confident, authoritative way and come across as more articulate - I believe this is a key reason why at interview stage they find more success than less privileged candidates. Some of the international firms (including my own) appear to suffer less from this problem of recruitment in one's own image as they simply have a very diverse range of partners due to their international nature.
Posted on: 10 Apr 2008
Racial discrimination is ILLEGAL - if you truly believe you have been discriminated against DO something about it! Similarly sexual orientation discrimination is illegal - check for firms which are "Stonewall Champions". Good luck - intersting this topic has had so many postings....
Posted by: Douglas McBean on 17 Apr 2008
© Copyright and database rights legalweek.com 2008. Powered by: Madgex Job Board Software
Friday 16/05/2008
Current Issue
Great work with a good work life balance Recent updates include Dundas, SJ Berwin, Linklaters, Eversheds, Simmons, Dentons, Clyde & Co and Pinsent Masons