Law couture
Going for a job interview is scary enough at the best of times. But when interviewing at a law firm or barristers' chambers, making a good first impression is crucial. Fantastic academic credentials aside, careful choice in your attire can help give you an edge over the other candidates. Looking professional has become more important than ever in today's difficult economic climate. Cliff Burgess, business development manager at gentleman's clothing retailer TM Lewin, comments: "It has been said that people in the City regard wearing a smart suit, tie and cufflinks as donning a suit of armour. That applies more than ever right now."
May 12, 2009 at 06:47 AM
6 minute read
Too often students and trainees are let down by their choice of clothes. Monika Ghose reports on how to dress for success
Going for a job interview is scary enough at the best of times. But when interviewing at a law firm or barristers' chambers, making a good first impression is crucial. Fantastic academic credentials aside, careful choice in your attire can help give you an edge over the other candidates.
Looking professional has become more important than ever in today's difficult economic climate. Cliff Burgess, business development manager at gentleman's clothing retailer TM Lewin, comments: "It has been said that people in the City regard wearing a smart suit, tie and cufflinks as donning a suit of armour. That applies more than ever right now."
This may explain why Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer sent its lawyers off to grooming classes in December – where, amongst other things, they were taught how to achieve the 'Freshfields look'.
But making the change from 'scruffy' student to polished professional isn't always straightforward – and often requires a change of mindset.
Caroline Lindner, graduate recruitment manager at Allen & Overy, advises students "to err on the side of caution and aim for 'very smart indeed'". She continues: "Law firms are traditional places – so students should try to reflect that."
Of course, students are often broke, so finding the money to impress can be tricky. Ekaterina Zelenova, a BVC graduate who is currently seeking pupillage, says: "When shopping for smart clothes on a student budget it is best to stick to the sales – that's all you can do really."
There is an art to looking sharp on the cheap, however, as Burgess explains: "The devil is in the detail. The key is to look good, regardless of the cost of the outfit. You can buy a £5,000 suit and it can still look bad if it is in the wrong size and not well looked after. Shoes should be clean and shiny and trouser creases razor-sharp. Shirts must be clean and well ironed. Tie must be appropriate. You can achieve a very smart look on a small budget providing you pay attention to those details."
Others advise students not to get too carried away. Paul Evans, a law graduate, says: "As a student I never, ever wore a suit. I did placements, but at the time it was a case of cobbling together what I had. Keep it simple: the worst thing is to try to dress like a 'lawyer' – you'll just look like a prat. It is not normal for a 21-year-old to wear an absurdly expensive suit with a silk hankie sticking out of the pocket."
For women, the style rules can be more complex. According to recent press reports, female lawyers are encouraged to wear high heels yet keep their necklines modest – quite a fine line to walk… in said heels. Really high, skyscraper heels are a no-no though, as are short skirts, radical hair cuts and lots of jewellery. "Wear discreet studs, not chandeliers," warns Burgess. Although suits are generally expected, they are not mandatory for women. "They can get away with a skirt and top," says Lindner.
"The basic rule is to try to blend in," adds Zelenova, "which means no boots, patterned tights or short skirts."
"As a trainee it is better to be too formal than underdressed," says Marieke Datema, a six-month trainee at Jones Day. "Dress to the highest level you can – you don't want to be seen as the scruffiest person in the room!"
But in these days of the 'smart casual' working wardrobe and 'casual Fridays', how can young lawyers avoid the casual fashion pitfalls?
Freshfields' Deborah Dalgleish believes the key is for individuals to use their own judgement: "For dress-down Fridays we trust people to dress appropriately, but wouldn't expect them to come in dressed for a club!"
Tom Bainbridge, an associate at Jones Day, elaborates on what is expected: "At Jones Day I wear a suit Monday to Thursday, and during that time I may or may not wear a tie. On Fridays you can be slightly less formal, but that doesn't really extend to jeans."
Playing it safe seems to be the best option. But with all this conformity, does individuality matter at all? Datema doesn't seem to think so. "I don't feel a need to show my individuality – it isn't an issue for me."
Zelenova has a similar take: "There is a lot of pressure to be conservative. You do get judged on your appearance. At one chambers I applied to, a pupil was told off for wearing jeans when she was just coming in to pick up some papers."
Perhaps the best way to look at formal dressing is that it is an act of courtesy: "There aren't many cases where you need to see a professional and you pay a lot of money for lawyers, so it is reassurance – you need to appear capable," says Evans. "It gives the work you do a sense of gravitas."
Interview fashion do's and don'ts
Deborah Dalgleish, Freshfields head of UK trainee recruitment: "For interviews, the last thing you want is to be worrying about whether your skirt is too short. Dress smart. Clothes must be crease-free, sensible, business focused, clean and tidy – but, most of all, comfortable, so that you can concentrate. Don't wear too much aftershave/perfume: you don't want to leave behind a lasting memory of your aroma!"
Cliff Burgess, business development manager at TM Lewin: "For an interview, go for a white or blue shirt and a conservative tie. I would recommend a plain grey or plain navy suit. Keep stripes subtle. While you want to get your personality across, you don't want to come across as too extravagant or 'shouty'. If you want to inject colour, the tie is the best place to do it, but do it within reason. A striped tie of a club nature works well, as does a discreet motif, providing it's not too flamboyant. Never wear joke ties or heavy checks. I would not recommend jewellery for men – especially avoid earrings – but a signet ring or watch is fine. Facial jewellery is definitely out."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAshurst Beijing Chief Representative Leaves for New York Boutique Sterlington
Baker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Axiom-Ince: SFO Charges Five, Including Former Head, Following Investigation
3 minute readSDT Upholds SLAPP Claim Against Osborne Clarke Partner Advising Nadhim Zahawi
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250