Magic circle continues to cut trainee intakes as firms rethink recruitment
Magic circle firms are continuing to reduce UK trainee numbers, with the combined intake down 17% since 2010.
September 24, 2014 at 01:01 PM
4 minute read
Magic circle firms are continuing to reduce UK trainee numbers, with the combined intake down 17% since 2010.
Across the group, the total intake has declined from 584 to 482 over the period, falling every year individually bar 2013.
Clifford Chance's (CC) trainee numbers are down by just over a quarter since 2010 – the highest percentage drop in the elite club. The firm is closely followed by Allen & Overy (A&O) with a 23% decrease, while Linklaters has seen its total trainee numbers fall from 136 in 2010 to 115 this year – a 15% decline.
Slaughter and May, the magic circle firm with the smallest intake, has gone from an annual intake of 88 to 74 over the period – a 16% drop; however, year on year its intake size has fallen by 21% after spiking at 94 in 2013.
Only Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer has remained broadly stable, taking on only two fewer trainees in 2014 than five years ago.
The drop in target intake size has been a deliberate strategy on the part of firms, reflecting in part the growth of business outside the UK. Both Allen & Overy (A&O) and CC have previously announced plans to cut back target intakes. CC, which had a target of 120 trainees, plans to recruit only 100 from next year, saying that this goal "follows more accurately the number of English-qualified lawyers we anticipate needing for our English law practice in the UK and the rest of the world in a few years' time".
A&O has also made public its plans to scale back on trainee positions in recent years. In 2009, at the height of the financial crisis, the firm announced it would cut its trainee intake from 120 to 105 from 2011. Two years later, the firm said it would take on only 90 trainees per year from 2014, before revising this target again last August to 85 trainees annually as of 2015.
In addition to the changing geographic spread of work, caution in the wake of the post-Lehman crash also explains the decline.
"Each year we spend time considering our numbers," says Nick Rumsby, trainee development partner at Linklaters. "Obviously there is a long lead time between recruitment and the point of qualification as associates. We look at current business levels in London and our other offices, as well as our current business plans, and draw on our experiences through the different economic environments."
—————————————————————————————————————————–
- How effective is your law firm's IT? Complete this survey for a chance to win an iPad Air
—————————————————————————————————————————–
Away from the size of initial intakes, much of the attention when it comes to trainees is on the proportion that end up taking qualified lawyer jobs at their chosen firm.
For example, when A&O last year down-scaled its projected intakes, it said it wanted to make sure there was "a strong prospect of a long-term career with the firm after qualification". Previously, the firm had said trainee numbers needed to reflect the fact that the London office was not growing as fast as before.
The average retention rate across the magic circle improved this year, up from 81% to 87%, bucking 4% and 3% drops in 2011 and 2012 respectively. Slaughters and Linklaters boasted the best rates, posting 96% and 90% respectively.
"A reduction in retention in one particular year does not necessarily mean there is a long-term issue – the key is to look at the longer term and the question of consistency," says Robert Byk, graduate recruitment partner at Slaughters.
"A lower retention rate could be to do with the market or indeed the particular cohort. In my view, if you have really good people who you are letting go because of a short-term market view that's disappointing. Good people are likely to generate work and have strong careers."
With intakes at the elite firms set to dwindle further in the coming years, competition for the brightest young legal talent will only increase, and a healthy retention rate is a good tool to help attract the best.
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 AllCan AI Beat the Billable Hour? Legal Tech Firms Say Selling AI Products to Law Firms Still a Challenge
More Young Lawyers Are Entering Big Law With Mental Health Issues. Are Firms Ready to Accommodate Them?
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5Data-Driven Legal Strategies
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