Participants share their experiences
As part of Ultra Vires’ recruit survey, we asked the Class of 2025 long-form questions about their experiences, their recruit results and final decisions, and their general thoughts on the recruit. Select responses to those survey questions were anonymized, edited for clarity, and reproduced below.
Do you have any comments on the Career Development Office (CDO)’s services for the recruit process (regardless of whether you participated in the recruit)?
When asked to rank the CDO on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being “Not at all helpful” and 5 being “Very helpful,” the average response was 4.2. Most of the comments were very positive.
It was great how available the CDO made themselves during interview week—having them to turn to for strategizing in real-time was invaluable.
The panels they organized with previous students who had been through the recruit and the office hours were incredibly helpful.
I found the CDO to be an extremely useful resource as someone who had no idea about what to expect from this process. From resume and cover letter revisions to mock interviews, the CDO helped me prepare every step of the way.
Most respondents consulted with Theresa Chan, followed by Aglaia Lowo and Gina Alexandris. A small minority of respondents did not consult with any individual CDO staff.
The CDO was incredibly supportive. I particularly appreciate Theresa for allowing us to call her anytime during the in-firm interview week, which was very helpful when I was conflicted over a difficult decision. Theresa was also great at conducting mock interviews, and I found that many of my OCIs were extremely similar to her mock interviews.
Theresa is awesome. She really helped me with my resume and cover letter, and she made sure that my strengths shined through. She was also responsive during in-firm week. Give her a raise!
Theresa’s near-instant email responses mid-recruit were life-changing.
Some respondents identified specific areas where the CDO could improve.
The CDO was a little too biased, and they had insights mostly from those who were successful from the previous recruit.
While mock interviews were very helpful for soothing my anxiety, they did not at all reflect what the interviews looked like during the recruit. My interviews were 100% conversational, so the behavioural question prep wasn’t all that helpful.
It prepares you well to be competitive at a baseline level, but it won’t take you over the top.
Respondents also commented that the CDO was less helpful for those seeking employment outside of big law.
It would be helpful to have more information and resources available for areas of private practice law outside of corporate law.
Completely useless for the government recruit. The guide claims to have been updated in April of 2023, and yet still has the names of boards that haven’t existed since 2019 and the old names of ministries from before 2019 as well. Much of the information is inaccurate and out-of-date based on my discussions with current Crown counsel and my own experiences from being in government.
Do you have any comments on networking?
89% of respondents engaged in some form of networking before applications were due. Coffee chats were the most common form of networking. Firm tours (virtual and in-person) were also popular. Of those who networked, 71% of respondents networked with the employer from which they accepted an offer.
Some respondents found networking helpful, especially for determining firm culture and fit.
It had a crucial impact on my personal ranking of my top firms and determining what questions I needed to ask going into in-firm interviews.
In my case, I believe it really made a difference that I made my interest in the firm very clear early in the process.
It is so important to network before you interview. I don’t think I would have had the success that I did otherwise! It’s great to show that you’re serious about them.
I think it’s pretty important, especially if you have lower grades like me.
Other respondents were less sure about the effect of networking on their ultimate recruit results.
It’s hard to say how valuable networking was to the ultimate outcome. I received OCI invitations from employers I did not network with at all, and did not receive OCI invitations from employers I did network with. However, I felt that networking was overall very useful in helping me assess cultural fit with each firm.
It’s possible that some firms do expect you to be able to name drop a coffee chat in your cover letters, and certainly that’s the advice I got from the CDO, so I did that. But also some firms that I didn’t coffee chat with still offered me OCIs, and some that I did coffee chat with didn’t offer me OCIs, so things work in mysterious ways.
Out of the three firms where I received an in-firm offer, I only spoke briefly with the summer student at the first and networked with an associate at the second (who interviewed me at the OCI), but not with anyone from the third. I think the networking helped me immensely for the second firm, probably not for the first, and definitely not for the third. In terms of receiving OCIs, I was surprised that very few of the firms where I networked extended an OCI to me.
I’ve found that networking serves different purposes for different types of firms. For younger and mid-size firms, regardless of how competitive the candidate’s qualifications are, demonstrating genuine interest in working there is crucial to getting an OCI. Networking and subsequently name-dropping is an important part of demonstrating that interest. However, large established firms assume that you want to work there. Thus, the primary purpose of networking shifts towards gaining insights for yourself, helping you determine whether it’s a place where you’d like to work.
Networking is something everyone should do because it has value and can largely happen over the summer when you are substantially less busy, but I do think it is less important the stronger your grades are.
Some respondents found that it was not helpful at all, or had negative comments about networking in general.
I found that it made no difference for me; I was successful having not done any networking at all.
Honestly I don’t think it did anything in terms of influence. Only coffee chat if you’re genuinely interested in learning.
Networking had no impact on getting OCIs.
I hate it, but the person I spoke to was nice.
Leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Do you have any comments on the virtual or in-person events?
This year, the number of virtual events seemed to have decreased, with only 17% of respondents participating in virtual events. By contrast, 78% of respondents participated in in-person events. When asked to rank how much they thought their choice of which events to attend ultimately influenced which firms made them offers on a scale of 1 (No influence) to 5 (Significant influence), the average score was 3.1. When asked if interviews or events were more important for receiving an offer on a scale of 1 (Events) to 5 (Interviews), the average score was 4.2.
Respondents commented that there was some pressure to attend events, and that declining events could lead to being eliminated from a firm’s hiring process.
I had a firm stop considering me solely because I (kindly) declined their dinner because I had already committed to another.
From my experience, I believe that if you do not go to the events with the firm, you will not receive an offer. Simple as that.
If the government offers a reception, you have to go.
I was informed by my first-choice host after the recruit that me not attending the dinner they hosted was a major factor in why I didn’t receive an offer from them.
I found receptions to be only moderately important (although an absence likely would have been perceived negatively), whereas dinners were significant in winning over the firm (or vice versa).
Some respondents commented that events were helpful for getting to know the employer and the people working there.
The receptions actually were really helpful in getting to know the vibe of the firm and the people you could be working with.
There were some meals where I didn’t feel as comfortable due to the lawyers being a bit “bro-y.” But during the dinner with the firm I ultimately chose, the lawyers made me feel so welcome, and I felt very comfortable being myself. I left that dinner with clarity regarding my first-choice firm.
They are nice and allowed for more casual and candid conversations, but it also felt like employers tried to monopolize my time.
What did you not want your interviewers to know about you?
Respondents worried about employers learning about their personal details.
I was stressed about showing my tattoos.
My religious background.
My family details.
My income bracket.
Details about my personal life (beyond surface-level anecdotes about hobbies/interests if they were relevant to the conversation).
Everything about me and what I’ve done.
Some respondents did not want employers to know about their reasons for participating in the recruit or their true interests.
How few employers I was meeting with that week, and that I only wanted this job so I can pay off my law school debt as soon as possible before working in public interest.
What kind of firms I was deciding between.
That I already had an offer from the New York recruit.
That I didn’t know exactly what I wanted to do, and that I didn’t like business.
That I would not be here if not for the hefty paycheques.
My background in sustainability.
One of the clinics I am participating in.
Did any of the employers you interviewed with ask you inappropriate questions or make you feel uncomfortable?
Of the 66 students who responded to this question, 15.2% of respondents were asked inappropriate questions or made to feel uncomfortable. Most of the inappropriate behaviour was associated with first-choice language and asking students what other firms they were interviewing with.
Two firms asked me to indicate if they were my first choice when they met with me after my initial interview and were explicitly trying to sell me on the firms. They were the only two firms that I did not receive offers from after failing to tell them they were my first choice.
In my second interview with a litigation boutique, both name partners were present for my interview. While the interview itself was mostly pleasant, I felt uncomfortable because they kept disparaging the recruit process and threw insults at students for being “brainwashed” and the CDO for being largely ineffective.
I was pressured for first-choice language at a dinner with a managing partner.
Out of 68 respondents, 91% gave first-choice language to one employer, 3% gave first-choice language to more than one employer, and 4% did not use first-choice language at all. 49% of respondents’ first-choice employer changed during the recruitment process, while it did not change for 47% of respondents. Of those whose first-choice employer changed, 75% of them changed their first choice during in-firms, 11% changed between OCIs and in-firms, and 6% changed during OCIs.
Had a situation where an employer asked about the TMU pro-Palestine petition, clearly trying to determine students’ positions on the matter.
Did you experience any employers not following Law Society of Ontario (LSO) Procedures?
About 13% of respondents experienced employers not following procedures, but only three respondents shared details of their experience. Breaches or circumvention of the LSO procedures should be reported to the Law Society’s Director of Licensing and Accreditation, by emailing [email protected].
Offer was communicated before the prescribed date, but this is the one “offence” that actually plays in the student’s favour in a very pro-employer process, and I’d prefer not to name and shame.
More than one employer broke the rules (prefer not to disclose), but large full-service firms on Bay Street really tried to ascertain first choice on every single day of the recruit. In fact, whether or not you continued on in the process with some firms seemed to depend on that.
Editor’s Note: One respondent shared that a firm emailed applicants about their intent to offer OCIs on the first day of school (rather than waiting for the official OCI announcement date). OCI procedures are at the discretion of the individual law school, and U of T allows firms to communicate their intent to call students regarding OCIs before the official OCI announcement date.
What, if anything, would you change about the recruitment process?
Many respondents would change the timeline of the recruit. Some commented that the length of the full process caused weeks of stress and anxiety. Others believed that certain parts should be more spread out so that participants would feel less time pressure.
In-firm week consumed my entire life, both during the week and weeks prior. The process is inherently set up so that you can’t think about anything else, and it feels absolutely imperative that you get a position (even though this is NOT true). There must be a better way of structuring recruitment so students can prioritize their mental and physical health.
The process should be shorter and require less socializing.
Make it virtual if the time is so compressed.
Call Day following OCIs should be much closer to the actual date that OCIs were completed. This was the period during which I was probably the most anxious. Additionally, employers should just extend you an offer once they confirm their interest during or after an interview, instead of forcing us all to wait for those terrible two hours to hear back.
I think first interviews shouldn’t be allowed after Monday. By then you already kind of know what firms you’re interested in, and I think it’s unfair for the employers. It’s hard not to feel like you’re wasting their time if you put your fifth choice first thing on Tuesday. Also it just gives you more flexibility to schedule Tuesdays, which you need to do on the fly.
I wish in-firms were more spread out. It would be better if it was an entire week.
Respondents also expressed dissatisfaction with having to navigate first-choice language during in-firms.
There is so much pressure to give first-choice language. Get rid of first-choice language. It puts so much undue pressure on the student! Or, if anything, make it that if you give first-choice language, the employer has to tell you whether they intend to offer you a job so you know whether you can then give the language to another firm.
Get rid of the first-choice language nonsense. It makes the process too much of a game. I had two firms pressing me for first-choice language, but I couldn’t give it to them because I had given it to someone else. Trying to get me to use first-choice language became the focus of our interviews as opposed to actually getting to know each other.
First-choice language process seemed problematic during the week. I know several extremely qualified people who didn’t get an offer simply because they chose the wrong employer to give first-choice language to, which they couldn’t take back, and the employer did not let them know they should take it back.
Respondents generally wanted less activities, or for non-interview activities such as social activities and thank you notes to be forbidden altogether.
Less events outside of interviewing.
Dinners should not exist.
I’d love for firms to let me know that they didn’t want me after the second day interview so I could forfeit the dinner event they host that night.
LSO should mandate no thank you notes.
Some respondents preferred the rolling format of the New York recruit over the structured Toronto recruit.
I would make the Toronto recruitment process similar to the recruitment process for New York. I believe having the recruitment take place over the summer and allowing employers to hire on a rolling basis is better for students’ well-being.
Get rid of this entire weird process completely and replicate the US recruitment system.
Overall, respondents commented that the entire process felt arbitrary and that it reinforced a power imbalance between employers and students, with employers holding all the power.
Employers need to be significantly more transparent about what they’re looking for from students and how students can potentially meet those expectations. Instead, the recruit is extremely opaque, which gives rise to the perception that unconscious biases play a rather large role in who is actually hired.
It’s such a power imbalance where you’re expected to show your cards, but the firms don’t show theirs. And every firm plays things differently.
This process creates a crazy power imbalance for the employers. I would like to see more honesty from the employers. Like sending rejection emails after OCIs so we’re not left wondering. The three days of in-firms also seems like overkill. I think it strings students along.
The guidelines fail to create a stress-free, transparent, and fair process.
I struggle to see the justification for how the system is designed.
What advice would you give to someone participating in the process next year?
Respondents’ advice varied greatly and covered a broad range of topics.
Prepare for the process as early as possible. Importantly, be yourself and try not to regurgitate scripted responses; just let the conversation flow naturally and you’ll be fine!
Trust that you’ll be less nervous once you get the first interview over with (true of OCIs and in-firms). For that reason, for in-firms I would recommend scheduling your favourite firm in your second or third spot on Monday to get some nerves out.
In-firms were way more conversational than I expected, although that might have had to do with the specific firms that I interviewed with. Worry less about trying to impress your interviewers with the content of your answers; it’s more about having a conversation, active listening, and showing interest.
Don’t underestimate the strategic element of the process when managing your time and following up with people. Lean on your host to gauge how the process is going. Be proactive when communicating with firms (asking for additional conversations and whom you would like to meet with). Show your enthusiasm about a firm as much as possible. Leave room for breaks to reflect, send emails, and disengage from the process for a while.
If you are assigned an articling student host at a firm, they can be a helpful resource to turn to for anecdotal experience about how a firm shows interest and the timing of cuts as you go through the process.
Don’t overdo it with networking. I promise that sometimes networking can backfire.
Define your goals and think about where you want to work and what kind of work you want to do. Be flexible and open-minded with the different firms you meet.
Make sure you understand what first choice language is and how to use it. It could be the difference between getting an offer and not.
Try for the New York recruit first. You’ll have your resume/materials prepared, and it’s much easier to go through the Toronto recruit if you already have a job lined up.
This is a poker game. You’ve got to know when to hold ’em, when to fold ’em, when to walk away, And know when to run. If you show your cards too early, you will look desperate.
Respondents emphasized the importance of having strong support networks during the process, including friends and family not in law school who can provide an outside perspective.
Talk to your friends throughout the week and compare how the same firms are treating you! This will be so helpful in assessing which firm you give your first-choice language to.
Go home if you can. Leave the law school bubble during the recruit.
Have someone you can talk to who is not going through the recruit.
Finally, respondents shared positive words of encouragement to future participants.
You can only accept one offer, so you only need one offer at each stage.
Put in your best efforts, but remember that it is not the end of the world if you don’t receive an offer at the end of the day. We have a long career ahead of us, and this is just a blip in our successful career.
It will be very difficult, but try to remember that the recruit is not the end of everything. There will be so many job opportunities available after the recruit is over, even if you don’t get an offer through this process. For myself, having this perspective helped me relax and perform at my best throughout the interview process.
Enjoy the process the best you can. You will meet a lot of interesting people, and this is the best part.
Are you satisfied with the results of the recruitment process?
Out of 70 respondents, 93% respondents were satisfied with the outcome of the process. Most respondents were satisfied because they secured a job for the summer of 2024.
I was fortunate enough to receive offers from both the firms I interviewed with, but more than that, I truly believe I learned a lot. I was forced to reflect on myself and what I want, and I learned invaluable soft skills to help me find success in interviews, like listening for verbal cues, reading changes of energy, and knowing when to go off script to deliver an impactful point.
I ended up at a firm where everyone I met was surprisingly friendly and humble, even though they are all leading lawyers. I didn’t realize that such a welcoming work environment could exist.
I enjoyed my in-firm experience a lot more than I anticipated. Most people were kind, and if you lean into the process it can be kind of fun. That said, it’s also an emotionally and physically exhausting process that requires a lot of mental strength and resilience. I want future students to know that this process (and the outcome) doesn’t dictate their worth.
Others were satisfied with their experience of the process despite not securing employment through the recruit.
Didn’t get a job but learned a lot.
I learned a great deal. Private firms are not my top area of interest, but the experience will help me with interviews for jobs that are a better fit for me in the future.
Some respondents were left unsatisfied with their results.
Months of effort and delaying school work only to not get an offer. And jobs after the formal recruit are not highlighted nearly as much as they should be.
Do you have any closing thoughts?
While I’m sure all firms have good intentions, at the end of the day, they are not prioritizing you. You have to prioritize yourself at all stages of the recruit. Be respectful and professional, but make sure that at the end of the day you do what you can to come out with an offer.
I was surprised to find that firms read heavily into your experience as an expression of your interests, far more than I expected. As early as 1L, the extracurriculars you take on, like clinic selection, can be read into. I find this slightly unfair as I had no clue what I was doing in 1L September and was seeking not to craft a perfect narrative on my resume, but to take on interesting experiences for myself.
The recruit was the most stressful experience I have ever gone through. My acne got out of control. I gained and lost weight like I was a professional fighter, without the exercise. I had never felt such sharp anxiety over a prolonged period of time as I did during the recruit. I never saw my friends or family. Despite all of that, I think I needed this for my growth as an individual. Keep in mind, I probably have rose-coloured lenses on because I found success, but I think I would have still felt this way regardless of the outcome because I let go of my expectations at the beginning of the process. That is the biggest piece of advice I have. Let go of your expectations and maintain a broad perspective, because the recruit truly is not the be-all, end-all.
This process is hard for everyone for a multitude of reasons, whether that be financial pressures, poor grades, or as in my case, being terrible at interviewing. My biggest piece of advice is to not compare yourself to others. Having more OCIs or being invited to a reception/dinner truly means nothing in the end. Focus on yourself and doing your best, not on others. In the end, you only need one job.
So much of the available career development resources focus on the recruits, but the jobs available are quite narrow in range. There is pressure to take part, but I expect that there are many people like myself who find they are not a good fit and would benefit from greater support in finding jobs outside the recruit process.
One final thought perfectly encapsulated most experiences with the recruit:
Crazy-ass process. Couldn’t pay me to do it again.
