In their Own Words: 2022 Recruit Survey Responses

The Class of 2023 reflect and provide feedback on the 2L recruit

Every year, Ultra Vires conducts an anonymous survey of the 2L class about the Toronto Recruit. We have summarized their responses to the long-form questions below. Thank you to everyone who shared their responses. This year, of the 130 students who responded to our survey, 82 percent participated in the recruit. Students who did not participate indicated that they pursued/accepted a legal job in a different market, returned to a 1L employer, or were uninterested by the participating employers.

Do you have any comments on the CDO’s services during the recruitment process?

Students generally had positive interactions with the Career Development Office (CDO) and appreciated the timely responses, UTLC Library resources, and services such as application material review and mock OCIs:

• “Very supportive and helpful, pretty punctual, the resource library had awesome documents (could be a bit confusing to find stuff, would prefer if it was sorted from newest uploads).” 
• “Fabulous, everyone is very approachable. My application materials improved a lot because of their comments.”
• “Gave me confidence to lean into my retail experience!”
• “I used the CDO during the US recruit to help prepare me for in-firms. Most of the advice carried over to the Toronto recruit when recruiting to split my summer”

However, many expressed dissatisfaction with the focus on corporate careers:

• “They were really helpful in reviewing application materials and providing good information for Call Day and In-Firms. However, more consideration should be given to students who have not applied to large firms at all. For example, when speaking generally at the info session sometimes it was unclear if certain advice was only applicable to large or medium firms, but not to government or certain boutique firms.”
• “The CDO’s programming was tailored specifically to Bay St employers, which I was not interested in.”
• “They should update their government guide and ask students to volunteer their help!”

The CDO currently employs three full-time staff members. Recognitizing understaffing as an issue, students urged the school to increase CDO staff:

• “Very helpful but hard to get an appointment, please hire more CDO staff to help them out!”

Although the majority of students supported the CDO, there were concerns:

• “Lacklustre, sometimes outright bad advice.”
• “Helpful to an extent, but I found coffee chats with students to be much more beneficial.”
• “They were definitely helpful, but I think there were definitely a few times where I doubted my own judgement as a consequence of something they’d said, where I should have relied on my gut feeling and instincts (ie. when to email employers, etc). That said, it was definitely still helpful to hear.”
• “They scared me more than they helped sometimes.”

Do you have any comments on networking?

There was a range of feelings towards networking. 

Some thought it was essential for signalling interest and distinguishing firms. Others noted that while their usefulness in securing a job may be limited, networking helped them be more prepared and confident for interviews:

• “I networked significantly with my ultimate employer.”
• “I don’t think it helped me get any extra OCIs. I do feel I was able to learn more about the firm and eloquently talk about the firm in interviews because of the networking I did.”
• “Helpful for me to distinguish between employers, not clear exactly how helpful it was securing interviews. I received OCI offers from several firms to whom I did not name drop in cover letters.”
• “100% necessary and helpful to the entire interviewing process.”
• “Do it! Leaving a great first impression with recruiters through networking is very helpful, and they’re usually happy to chat with you.”
• “I think that networking really can help you get your foot in the door. If you’re applying to a firm that values grades, and you don’t have them, then networking won’t help much. But if you apply to a firm that cares less, and your grades are not the best, networking can help get your foot in the door.”
• “Networking via informational interviews can help you get comfortable with the conversational interview structure of OCI/in-firms.”

Others criticised networking, considering it a waste of time with no impact on their recruit success or a poor practice that unjustifiably favours those with more time: 

• “In the context of government, networking is not very important. I ended up getting two offers each from government employers I did not network with. It is good to get to know more about a certain office, but that is only if you feel comfortable doing it. I hated networking!”
• “It sucks and I’m angry that I wasted time doing it.”
• “I hate that networking is so important, it favours people who have more time because they have less to worry about, and those who are already in the sphere of lawyerness.”
• “What a fucking waste of time!”

Many students advised next year’s applicants to begin the process early and be selective with how they network, as the process is extremely time consuming:

• “Very time consuming over the summer, I wish I started earlier to spread it out more.”
• “Good luck balancing work and networking in the summer. August is hellish. The networking is basically a second job – one that has no guarantee of payoff either.”
• “Coffee chats > firm tours.”
• “I chose to network very sparsely with only my top choices. While it certainly didn’t hurt my applications, I don’t think it was a huge help either. I got interviews with firms I didn’t network with at all, while I was rejected by one of the few firms I did network with. If you do network, use it as an opportunity to develop a convincing answer for “why this firm” instead of treating it as a transaction where you’re simply giving up some of your time in exchange for a name you can drop.”

Do you have any comments on the virtual events?

An overwhelming number of students expressed dislike:

• “They are terrible. No one wants to see the people they are competing with and have to make small talk with others. It pits you against each other and encourages competitive behaviour. Nothing of value is achieved at these events.” 
• “Do not do them. Nobody enjoys them because they tend to just be another portal for the employers to judge you.”
• “Pointless. Felt like a chore. Did not give me much insight. Did not feel like they impacted the offers I received.”

Other enjoyed the opportunity to better understand a firm’s culture virtually: 

• “They’re 100% better than in-person ones! I imagine if it were in person students need to look out for “open circles” to join, now there were just break out rooms and nobody would have to worry about standing in the corner alone or fighting for lawyer’s attention. It’s more fair for students not from the privileged social class.”
• “Genuinely decent opportunities to assess firm culture. I went to two interesting and engaging events that left me feeling better informed about the culture at these firms, the lawyers at a third event had the charisma of a damp rag – this was also very informative.”

When it came to the impact of virtual event attendance on offers extended, student experiences varied: 

• “There were virtual events?”
• “The firms I interviewed with didn’t hold them! [Firm] held only a no pressure, external chat with a recruiter, which was helpful in terms of getting guidance, but wasn’t networking with the lawyers.”
• “After declining an initiation to a virtual event in the most gracious way I could from [firm], I was not invited back for a second interview. While I can’t definitively say that my rejection of the event invite was dispositive, I have heard of this happening in the past.” 

Did any of the employers you interviewed with ask you inappropriate questions or make you feel uncomfortable? 

Note, out of 130 respondents, 18 students responded to this question. More students reported they did not receive uncomfortable questions from employers compared to last year (75.% vs 71%). 

Generally, uncomfortable situations arose when employers aggressively gauged the student’s interest in the firm while seeking first choice language or probed students to disclose their other prospects: 

• “I felt pressure and received calls from recruiters telling me I was a top candidate and then asking if I had anything to tell them about where they ranked and when I refused to offer first choice language to them they did not extend an offer even though they indicated they would.”
• “I had a cold call from a partner at one of the firms I was interviewing at, fishing for first choice language. When I didn’t give it, said partner pushed me to disclose the names of the other firms I was meeting with and then proceeded to talk badly about those firms – and even gave me negative information that I knew to be inaccurate.”
• “One firm asked me to disclose which other firms I was interviewing with. The firm also scheduled me for a 30-minute Wednesday interview, which they did not show up to. After I emailed to inquire about rescheduling the interview to later in the afternoon, the firm told me via email that I was cut from their list of candidates.”
• “A boutique firm asked if I was only interviewing with other firms of the same type.”
• “[Employer] asked who I was going with when I turned them down. That was uncomfortable especially since, unlike firms, there is no expectation of using first choice language or the like with them.”
• “One firm had their managing partner come into the Zoom and he directly asked me how much my interest was in the firm after an interview. I was honest in saying that I was interviewing with a few other firms, and the managing partner cut me off with a “gotcha” and left the call.”

Some students received questions that were too personal:

• “Got told I wasn’t “passionate about corporate”. I’m sorry but how do you prove to someone you’re interested in “capital markets”? What the hell even is a capital market?”
• “A government OCI had a question about “facing adversity” that made me uncomfortable. It felt too deep and personal a question for an OCI. At the time it seemed my options were to either give a surface level response that did not really address the question or to answer honestly by discussing personal struggles I would have preferred not to disclose to a potential employer at that stage.”
• “I’d included a brief addendum to my transcript discussing my experiences going through 1L after having lost a close family member. While I was genuinely touched by several firms which very kindly expressed condolences throughout the process, in a few OCIs it became the predominant topic of discussion, which left me feeling pretty uncomfortable.”

What advice would you give to someone participating in the process next year?

Many students offered words of encouragement, hoping to empower the next generation of applications:

• “Don’t feel pressured to apply to employers you don’t want to. You can be very selective and apply to just a few employers that interest you. Large firms are not the only option in the recruit.”
• “Confidence is key – be yourself and be proud of who you are! A firm kept telling me how much they wanted to help me make my decision because they “knew I had a lot of options” – little did they know that they were my only in-firm.”
• “Go into it with the mindset of: I’m here to meet some great people and have some great conversations, let’s see what happens. Just feel good, it puts you at ease, and it puts your interviewers at ease.”
• “Don’t worry about the number of the OCIs you have. Quality over quantity!”
• “There is life beyond the recruit. Try not to take it personally. The recruit is one giant fucked up game of chance. You have a greater chance of winning squid games.”
• “If you’re interviewing with a firm, they’re already interested in you. You hold some power. Ask the tough questions that you care about. I asked my interviewers about diversity and inclusion in almost every interview. You’ll see some of them squirm, and you’ll hear some canned answers. Show that you’ve done research about the firm, and that you are curious to hear more, and then weave yourself into the question so they can start imagining you there.”

There was a strong emphasis on mental health and putting the recruit into perspective:

• “Do not base your self worth on this process.”
• “OCIs mean nothing in the long-run. You win the chance to work at a law firm for 4 more months over your career.”
• “Take care of your mental health, this process is long and frustrating and even the best candidates end up feeling awful about themselves.”

Other students had practical advice on submitting applications, and conducting OCIs and in-firm interviews:

• “Check, double check and re-check your applications. I’m pretty sure (99% sure) that I struck out because I sent in an incomplete law school transcript.”
• “Start working early! Drafting cover letters and coffee chats take so long. Use first choice language if you know it’s your first choice, it will be a game changer if you’re still in Day 3.”
• “As tempting as it is, do not read into what the interviewers say.”
• “For government, lots of preparation is key. For Bay St., I felt it was really important to be a “human” and not come across as overly rehearsed or robotic. Also, I did a lot of mock interviews, despite them being incredibly awkward.”
• “If you’re looking for a split with NY, be careful about when to disclose that to TO firms.”
• “Prepare lots of good questions to ask employers. You will be asking most of the questions. Also, never tell them that you are debating between them and another place. I got dropped by many firms this way.”
• “Striking the right balance between professional and casual is key. Firms are there to assess your competency, but they’re also there to assess whether you’re someone they’d like to work with. So demonstrate your skills when you can, and speak to your past experiences, but don’t force it. Don’t shy away from casual conversation that has nothing to do with your competencies.”

You’ve been warned:

• “It will consume your life at times from August-November.”
• “Don’t do it. It will make you question why you even went to law school.”

What did you not want your interviewers to know about you?

Amongst many concerns regarding their prospects, a large portion of students worried they appeared too focused on public for a full service firm: 

• “For Bay Street, that I was social justice oriented. For progressive firms, that I was applying/considering Bay Street.”
• “Elements of my CV were gently exaggerated.”
• “I had a clear top choice by the end of Day 1.”
• “They were my only interview.”
• “That I care about diversity.”
• “That I probably only want to stay at the firm for a few years.”
• “I was interested in another practice area than the one they assumed I was interested in.”
• “I was deciding between three firms.”

Other categories of concern included personal details such as material status, politics, and mental health:

• “That I don’t give a crap about capital markets. I’m also not a huge fan of defending oil companies in a global climate crisis but to each their own.”
• “My family income/social status.”
• “How nervous I was all the time.”
• “That I have mental health issues.”
• “That I have children.”
• “That I have a long-term partner. I’m always worried that they’ll think I’ll need to go on maternity leave at some point, and consider me less because of it.”
• “All of the doubts and fears and worries I have as a human being.”

What, if anything, would you change about the recruitment process?

In addition to the general dislike towards how the recruit process is structured as a whole, students made recommendations for improving specific recruit practices:

• “Call day and offer day – it should all be done through some electronic matching and ranking system the way that some schools run their Co-Op programs. The way the calls come in and the politics of scheduling, holding offers etc. causes unnecessary stress for students.”
• “No emails about in-firms prior to Call Day (intent to call emails)”
• “Abolish thank you emails. They take up so much time and can feel like a pointless box to check.”
• “If the employer decides to give out an offer, they don’t have to wait until Wednesday evening.”
• “Make U of T give us a separate vacation outside of reading week.”
• “Should be conducted in the Winter semester.”

We received a range of thoughts on the recruit’s length:

• ”How condensed it was. I went from stressed out to confident to happy to anxious to feeling immense dread in the span of a few hours. It makes little sense to me that students and firms are forced to compete with one another in this short amount of time, leading to the ridiculous pressure of “first choice” and making such a momentous decision in the span of 1-3 days.”
• “Shouldn’t be just a week. It’s literally an all or nothing. Sick? Doesn’t matter. Family crisis? Who cares. There’s no accommodation.”
• “The short timeline and first choice language, students should be able to receive numerous offers across several weeks and take time to consider what they feel will suit them best (more like New York).”
• “Would’ve been nice if the whole process went by faster than taking up basically the whole semester.”

Some would benefit from feedback:

• “I like that it’s structured so that all applications, interviews are at the same time with clear deadlines. Honest feedback for why a candidate is rejected would be helpful.”
• “I would appreciate it if employers could provide specific reasons why we were not selected for in-firms.”

Majority of responses indicated a strong dislike of signalling and offered alternative systems:

• “I wish in-firm interview times were randomly assigned. Some firms read way more into the time of your interview than others (“we’re booked for 2:00? This candidate must not be that interested”), and it’s extremely stupid.”
• “Take the emphasis off first choice! Put in a ranking system so firms feel they can extend offers without knowing for sure what a student is thinking.”
• “I don’t like that you have to gamble on a firm, and only pick one where you say it will be your top choice. I think the process should be more akin to the medical school residency matching process, where you rank schools, and based off your performance, you get assigned a school to do residency with.”
• “First choice language is the biggest BS that exists. At least firms should be transparent about whether they care about first choice language.”

Others call for a culture shift:

• “The entire culture around the recruit is suffocating. It’s really irritating to hear people talk about what jobs they got and who they’re working for. I’m not just saying this because I fucked up the recruit. Rather, real Gs move in silence. The simple fact that the recruit process leads friends and classmates to needle each other or brag about where they’re interviewing is indicative of a serious flaw in the process – there should be a confidentiality component to the recruit to stop students from getting too big for their britches.”
• “Everything – it’s way too stressful, and there is this huge “be all, end all” vibe surrounding it.”

Did you experience any employers not following LSO Procedures? 

Only 9 students out of the 130 survey participants responded to this question. As disclosed in the survey, responses have been shared with the SLS Recruit Subcommittee to inform their dialogue with the CDO as they work to bring necessary changes in the recruit structure.

• “They all followed them, but at least in terms of the bigger firms, I definitely found that was letter rather than spirit. I knew which firms were extending me offers (frequent phone calls and check ins from recruiters and the student committee, the words “top candidate”), and they definitely were looking for some confirmation from me, but no one outright asked me to rank them, and were definitely extremely careful to at least say they weren’t pushing me to do so. That said, the fact that I had been told repeatedly “not to trust firms” made me more stressed about my prospects than necessary.” 
• “I had an in-person dinner. I’m unsure if that was against the rules.”
• “Two national full-service firms told me they were offering me a job before Offer Day. One of them said it on Night 1 at the informal social event and the other said it multiple times from Day 2-3.”
• “Asking if they were first choice.”

Do you have any comments on the LSO Recruitment Procedures?

Majority of students urged for a systemic overhaul to better serve the interests of students: 

• “It’s quite apparent that the LSO should seriously consider changing the structure of the recruit to mirror some of the features of the New York recruit, particularly regarding in-firms (e.g., no multiple in-firm interview days, no pre-offer social events, no dedicated offer day and time, a longer period for the firm to hold an offer and for the offeree to respond (and allowing for “second looks” by offerees), and a genuine expectation by firms that students can respond at any time during that longer offer hold period and not within minutes of receiving an offer. It’s time to give students some more control in the recruit.”
• “Why is the definition of recruiting activities so ambiguous?”
• “The LSO recruitment procedures makes it worse for students and hands all the power over to the firms”
• “This really needs a complete revamp that benefits the students more and up to the modern era.”  
• “It leads to an unnecessary amount of additional stress for students who have to worry about mind games and first choice language while they’re already stressed enough about interviews. It forces firms to give out offers strategically, instead of just offering to their preferred candidates, out of fear that their offers might be rejected. The justification for the current process is that it’s meant to protect students, but in reality it does the opposite. Since firms aren’t allowed to tell candidates they’re giving them an offer in advance, but students can tell firms just about anything, all the power is in the firm’s hands. They have access to information about whether a student will accept their offer, but the student’s aren’t able to receive similar guarantees from firms, forcing students to leave their fates in the hands of the firm they choose to first-choice.”

Students also emphasised the need for effective enforcement mechanism:

• “No teeth. Horrible and traumatizing for impoverished and minority students.”
• “Useless. Every student going through in-firms is pressured by the firms to admit that they are your first choice. Every student knows that they are going to get an offer before call day. Firms skirt the lines of the rules. The real question is, even if they do violate., what is the recourse? Probably nothing I would imagine.”

The priorities of another lay elsewhere:

• “Let them send us food.”

Are you satisfied with the outcome of the recruitment process?

Responses here were polarized and primarily influenced by whether or not students received an offer. 

Given the increase in the number of U of T students hired this year, many were happy with their results:

• “I fell in love with a firm early in the process and had that love reciprocated. Genuinely excited to be starting my career with them next summer!”
• “Relieved to get a job at a good firm. Disappointed that I couldn’t get my first choice – all the rejections at every stage of the process sting – but I realize I’m in a fortunate position so trying to stay grateful for what I got.”
• “I feel fortunate to have ended up at the firm that was my top choice throughout the process. Even though the recruit was physically and mentally exhausting, it was also a great opportunity to meet new people and to learn more about the practice of law. I came out of it with a clearer sense of direction, and I’m looking forward to getting started on the path I’ve chosen.”

Even students who received offers had reservations about the process:

• “Satisfied because I received an offer but unsatisfied because I felt terrible about myself throughout the process for no reason, so many decisions are arbitrary and have nothing to do with a person as a candidate.”
• “I am satisfied because I got a job offer from my first choice. However, up until 5 PM on offer day, I was stressed out of my mind — even knowing there was a very strong likelihood I would get a call.”
• “I got an offer at a big firm, and I’m happy about it, but definitely feel like I may have caved to pressure in doing so.”
• “I got a job so I’m happy with my outcome, but some of my friends did get any offers. The recruit process also definitely favours extroverts so my less extroverted friends definitely struggled through it. Feels unfair.”
• “Yes, because I am ultimately happy with where I ended up. But as noted, I really do wish you could know more about your options (re who is going to call w an offer) before you have to start doubling down on telling a firm they are your first choice. I think this is especially hard for students who are interviewing across Bay St and Government/small firms (since government and small firms do not give the same kind of signals/feedback before call day that firms do).”

Others expressed frustration and disappointment: 

• “If I knew my race was going to be such a barrier to employment then I wouldn’t have bothered going to law school. I can be unemployed for much cheaper. I now deeply regret my decision to attend UofT Law.”
• “Wasted my summer and time doing this ridiculous process, constantly being asked about how it was going by other students made me feel like garbage and I honestly considered just quitting. I’d rather not have done it and maintained a shred of my self-esteem.”
• “I still don’t understand why I only got one OC interview, and the CDO didn’t understand either.”
• “The sentiments surrounding the recruit, perpetuated by the CDO and the Law School faculty and students, is that it’s a necessary part of our law school experience, when it’s just a niche job fair.” 
• “I didn’t get an offer lol.”

For some students, the Toronto recruit didn’t  work out for other reasons:

• “Didn’t really want to work at the places I interviewed at.”
• “I got a job from the Vancouver recruit. Toronto people seem not to like me very much anyway, and I have no regrets regarding that.”
• “I wanted a split and didn’t get it. Didn’t even get any in-firms lmao.”

Do you have closing thoughts?

Some felt stronger than others about this whole process:

• “Overall, I think I actually enjoyed the recruit process. I never thought I’d say this, but it was… fun? I loved getting to meet people and hearing their stories, and getting a better sense of what different law firms are like…”
• “The intensity of this process cannot be understated. Students should be encouraged to network earlier and prepare more questions for employers. LSO rules need to be better explained.”
• “The 2L recruit destroyed me.”
• “The recruitment process doesn’t have to be as stressful as it is. Not only is the process itself intense and just awful for many participants, the culture around it is very toxic. The school and CDO have started emphasizing opportunities outside of the recruit process, but it’s been mostly other students who have had to bear the burden of consoling peers and sharing resources. Not getting a call isn’t the end of the world, but UofT makes it seem like it is.”
• “While I tried my best throughout the process, I assumed from the beginning that I would most likely be unsuccessful. Even so, I felt sour from the result, but after watching a video about making donuts, I moved on and started working on my course outlines that evening. All in all, I think it makes up such a small part of my life that I don’t need to dwell on it too much. It’s better to focus on what you can control than what you can’t anyway.”
• “Such a wild and busy few months. Glad it’s over and I can actually focus on academics, my study time definitely took a nosedive!”
• “The process is entirely arbitrary and the outcome doesn’t define or limit your potential as a lawyer.”

Many students valued having a strong support system throughout the process:

• “Make sure you have support going through this. Be it family or friends. Try to have at least one group you talk to that is not going through the recruit to keep you sane. There will be times when talking to people in the recruit will overwhelm you. Don’t let this impact you or make you believe you don’t have a chance to get a job.”
• “The whole process is a lot. If you find yourself in a toxic environment during the recruit, feel free to remove yourself from that and focus on your values and interests! Remember this process is all sort of a black box and a lot of things are up to luck and outside your control. Trust yourself, be confident, and have a strong support system.”

When it comes down do it, this year’s 2Ls encourages you to think hard about the life you want:

• “Ask yourself: Will Bay St genuinely make you happy? If not, there’s not much you’re missing out if you don’t get anything from this recruit anyway.”
• “I am very glad I stayed true to myself. I interviewed mainly with government employers because I had very little interest in working for a firm. I skipped a virtual firm event because I knew I would not want to work there. I always asked about EDI because that is very important to me. This process can be extremely stressful — find ways to make it more comfortable and worthwhile for yourself.”
• “This process does define you. Not in terms of your worth – not at all. But it does define your story. I got rejected from every firm in the 1L recruit and because of that, started my career working in-house. Working at a company gives you the practice of learning its unique culture, positioning you for in depth client work above all else. Every experience is an asset and this is just another part of your story. If you got a job, excellent, but if not, enjoy the scenic ride by looking for jobs outside the formal process. Sometimes – in fact – usually – you learn better about yourself that way.”