Career Clinic: Is my withdrawn training contract better kept secret?

It surely all depends on how you spin it. If you come across as having failed for a sympathetic reason and having learned from the experience such that you are now even more determined to pursue this career path, then I’d imagine it would be worth mentioning.

Some Guy -07 Oct 2009 | 18:04

As with many similar posts in the past, this is surely a question of honesty and integrity. Would you feel comfortable not mentioning it? And if you don't, what if it comes out later - is it be worth the potentially embarrassing or difficult consequences? From what you say, half your GDL class knows about it and is in the same position - the course must be getting harder...

Anonymous -08 Oct 2009 | 11:10

No, don't mention it!!! To be blunt, it will make any recruiter feel like they are taking another firm's sloppy seconds, so they probably will say no. One negative thing alone is enough to put a firm off - I know this, having gone through tons of applications before finally getting my TC. Much better to say that you don't have a TC yet because you wanted to wait until you were sure what type of law you want to specialise in, or some other more positive reason. Then you will look more confident and there will be nothing negative about you to give them a reason to put you in the "No" pile. And it's highly unlikely that anyone would ever find out - how would HR from one firm find out what other applications you made, particularly as HR are bound by confidentiality, unless by some bizarre coincidence you happened to know someone in common?

Anon -08 Oct 2009 | 13:04

I'd say disclose it, without a shadow of a doubt.

The fact that you were good enough to get a TC from a top firm will help get you an interview at another firm. In reality most firms are chasing the small number of good trainees, so one offer, even if it was withdrawn, makes you more attractive to other firms. If you were good enough for them, surely you are worth an interview.

Do not explain the cause but simply say that the firm (and you should name it) made you an offer which was revoked. In the current climate other firms may assume it was just the first being ruthless and short of business. Be ready at your interview though for awkward questions about why it was withdrawn and why in any event you'd much rather be training at a less prestigious firm, so it is a blessing really.

Dullard -08 Oct 2009 | 16:26

You're barking

Absolutely barking mad. Firstly for failing the exam in the first place - how could you have the CV to get a training contract in a top 10 firm in the first place and then not the nous to work hard enough to pass the exams (or at least have a bloody good excuse so that your firm would have given you another chance)? Secondly, for thinking you won't be found out and that you won't spend at least your next set of articles (if you're lucky to find any) worrying about being found out. Thirdly, in this economic climate, for thinking (given the huge glut of over-qualified lawyers-to-be out there) that you could get another training contract.

City Woman -08 Oct 2009 | 16:31

I don't think the issue here is whether you should let prospective employers know about your withdrawn TC. This is a borderline ethical matter at best and I don't see why you should voluntarily submit that information. After all, they are not going to tell you whether you were part of their first choice of candidates or you only got to the interview stage because someone they made an offer to, rejected it.

The REAL problem is going to be whether you can secure another TC at a firm of the same standing having failed a subject on the GDL. Firms' application forms normally expect you to show every single subject result in your first degree, GDL and LPC and, assuming that you get to the interview stage, they will GRILL you about that exam. You better start thinking of something you can turn into a mitigating circumstance; and you'll have to do better than "My GDL mates Bill, Bob and Jim failed that exam too".

Legal pigeon -08 Oct 2009 | 17:13

You are not barking!

To City Woman: it's would be nice to think that you may be the image of perfection. But I'll bet you are a far cry from that. I am more inclined to agree with Dullard. So crap happens sometimes, and this person may have made a mistake for whatever reason. I think that you are obviously bright enough to have impressed a top law firm and any good recruiter will at least be interested to hear what you have to say. I have heard of many of these stories, and it is true indeed that many firms would not have taken a decision to revoke, even under these circumstances, if it was not for the current climate. I know of a number of former trainees in top law firms who failed exams in the past and were simply allowed to resit. Just make sure you are confident and ready for the challenge as there are so many negative people out there (a la City Woman). Remember tenacity, determination and resilience will get you a long way - just show that in an interview.

Anon -08 Oct 2009 | 17:18

same boat

I'm in roughly the same position as the original poster. I had a training contract offer from a top ten City firm, however failed an elective examination on the LPC.

I had mitigating circumstances for this - my aunty had been diagnosed with lung cancer a short while before the exam and my father who is already a heart patient was hospitalised due to extreme stress.

The firm however took the stance that "someone who fails an examination on the LPC does not go on to perform well in the office ... and it's just a business decision". I later discovered that they had kept on 3 or 4 candidates who have failed multiple exams on the LPC - so I am not sure how far to trust their viewpoint.

I have also spoken to partners at other top ten firms who are of the opinion that the LPC is not an evaluation of how well you perform as a solicitor and that all firms care about is seeing that you have completed it.

I too am worried about my position.. perhaps someone has already been in this situation and could share their views?

Searching Again -08 Oct 2009 | 22:49

I would not offer the information. What does it add? It's not current. It may also beg the question, 'if you failed one, are you likely to fail more on the LPC.' Not helpful.

Just try and get interviews and if you impress at interview, you stand a good chance of success because you have succeeded before.

Don't dwell on it if you can, it's a fact of life that sometimes people slip up in exams. Good luck.

anon -09 Oct 2009 | 09:51

In my experience, firms take a balanced view of trainee candidates who retake exams, especially if s/he has attributes that fit well into the firm's aims and culture.

I can't see that you're obliged to disclose the withdrawn offer from an ethical standpoint on reapplication; failing an exam has nothing to do with dishonesty. You should, however, be prepared to explain straightforwardly why you failed.

Any firm that reacts to this in a overly dramatic, disproportionate way (are you reading this, City Woman?) is not a good launchpad for your legal career. Perseverance.

Anonymous -09 Oct 2009 | 12:47

I know loads of trainees who failed exams and were able to resit - back in the day. Withdrawing TCs is just an excuse for law firms to cut costs right now - a false economy in my view as trainees are keen, cheap to charge out and offer good ROI in my view.

Anonymous -09 Oct 2009 | 13:26

Why are all these people with fantastic training conracts FAILING something as routine as a GDL or LPC exam?! Overconfidence? Not taking it seriously enough? These courses are time-intensive, perhaps, but they are not intellectually demanding. If I was a trainee recruiter, I'd surely put someone who'd failed an exam on the No pile. If you can't perform with the sort of pressures the GDL or LPC presents, how will you perform in the real world?

Anonymous -09 Oct 2009 | 15:36

city woman is right

She is! Unless you have decent mitigating circumstances, why would you fail the GDL, particularly if you were good enough on paper to get into a top 10 firm? It shows a lack of gumption to me. and no, I am not perfect.

dark -09 Oct 2009 | 15:56

The previous poster's comment about the 'real world' is so stupid. On entering the workplace in the 'real world', does every mistake result in a sacking? If so, I hope you never cock up.

Check your logic out first, mate.

anon -09 Oct 2009 | 16:01

The comment about the "real world" seems fair enough to me - we all know we have to pass the GDL and/or LPC to progress a legal career, so why on earth don't people just make sure they pass them? I don't think the poster is making a direct analogy between failing exams and getting the sack (and, indeed, there is no such analogy). All recruiters have to go on, to start with, are indicators like exam results and work experience, etc. If you can't pass the GDL, how good are you going to be in the field?

Anonymous -09 Oct 2009 | 17:18

Actually I think in a lot of cases every mistake does lead to a sacking, and particularly in the law.

Helen -12 Oct 2009 | 10:17

If a person thinks that GDL exams are easy, then they obviously haven't taken the course. The GDL is immensely time pressured, cramming the compulsory elements of a law degree into about 8 months' study. There are seven 3-hour exams crammed into a week and a half. It's no wonder people slip up on the occasional exam. (And, by the way, I have a first class degrees from a top university and completed the GDL first time round. It's HARD!).

Anonymous -12 Oct 2009 | 11:05

To the poster above saying that if anyone thinks the GDL is "easy" then they haven't done the course - I (and many others) did the PgDL part-time in the evenings whilst working full-time and still managed to get a distinction. It's not the hardest thing in the world! You may think it's hard because you have not done much else, but that's just an indication of your limited life experience.

Anonymous -13 Oct 2009 | 10:33

To the anonymous, arrogant and disparaging poster above, I also did the GDL full-time and it is a difficult course. I later did the LPC part-time and really detested 'mature' students like yourself who often led discussions on random/irrelevant tangents simply to listen to the sound of your own voice and bask in your overrated intelligence. I pity your colleagues for having to deal with you on a regular basis.

Anonymous -13 Oct 2009 | 12:32

To the anonymous poster above - you seem to know an awful lot about the poster you comment on! From their simple post how on earth did you work out their age, where and when they did the GDL/LPC, what discussions they did or didn't lead in class, how they rate their intelligence, and the mental state of their colleagues. God, you're good!

Anonymous -14 Oct 2009 | 12:46

Easy call - you should be showing any potential employer that despite your reasons for failing (slackness? stupidity? sensitive personal reason?) you at least understand the principles in the Solicitor's Code equating to honesty, integrity etc etc.

The question is not so much that you have made a mistake, we all do and it is the only way to learn and improve, more that if you are found to have been deceitful what is to stop an employer worrying about what you would do if you failed to transfer some monies, or make a payment or an application on time or not keep proper correspondence records. Would you fail to mention those too?

The most important thing is that any employer will need to feel they can trust their trainees to use common sense and maturity to deal with situations.

I'm more worried that you have even had to ask! Are you sure you intuitively have what it takes - and I'm not talking about brains?

There's no doubt you've made it considerably more difficult for yourself, and you might have to readjust your aspirations during your early career like widening the net to top 50 firms, top regional firms etc. Take the medicine and get on with it.

Anon -16 Oct 2009 | 11:49

Is it any wonder that people hate lawyers?

I cannot believe the bitchy and arrogant comments that I have read under this post. Several commentators appear to be so hell-bent on focusing on one negative aspect of the situation that they have failed to answer the main question in hand.

Personally I don't think that you have to disclose this information. However, I also know what it's like when you start working somewhere and information like this eventually gets divulged through growing confidences, or even worse at work drinks events where you feel that you can let your guard down.

I think that if you really like a firm and are keen to obtain a training contract with them then you should mention it, purely to avoid any future embarrassment. I think it will ease your conscience as there is nothing worse than building good working relationships and often friendships with those you work with and knowing that you are keeping or are trying to keep a secret from them.

Good luck!!

Anonymous -19 Oct 2009 | 13:20

Just do what my mate did in that situation. Get a couple of training contract offers elsewhere on the strength of your CV (wouldn't mention the failed exam/original TC unless you have to - many firms just want to know that you have passed the GDL/LPC). Then get back in touch with the original firm to tell them you are signing elsewhere. Imagine you will get the original TC back again - once people see you are in demand (plus they liked you to begin with - you only failed one exam, after all). If not, just go elsewhere. Job done.

Scamp -22 Oct 2009 | 13:13