Trowers & Hamlins has confirmed that it’s retained only eight of its 14 autumn qualifiers. Chances of trainees finding gainful employment at the firm are little more than the toss of a coin…
It’s not clear why the numbers are so poor. The firm wouldn’t provide any reason, claiming that “It would be inappropriate for us to comment on individual employment matters”. Hmm. It had no such scruples at the start of this year when it banged on at length about its stronger figures for its spring qualifiers.
It seems odd for Trowers to have taken the axe to its trainees like this given that most of its competitors are reporting very strong profits. But this year the firm has been plagued by rumours of a collapse in its core Middle Eastern business. That may have something to do with it. Or maybe its just got this round of grad rec spectacularly wrong. Answers on a postcard here please.
Comments
429
447
People left Trowers because the pay is woefully low, simple as that.
445
405
To be fair they seem to pay about average compared with firms of similar size (according to RoF’s Inside Info at least). I don’t know the details of Trowers qualifiers but there seems to be some automatic assumption that all trainees have to qualify where they train. Whilst this would be ideal we must consider people may find that law isn’t right for them after 2 years TC or perhaps dare I say they are not capable enough to be given an NQ job (which even with the best grad recruitment in the world is hard to avoid).
418
422
Any idea where did those six NQs go?
433
426
Everyone who applied had an interview but the firm didn’t offer certain trainees NQ jobs based on their performance during their TC. Simple.
442
411
True those who applied were not offered but some decided not to even apply....
428
426
A number of the trainees did not even apply for NQ jobs at the firm
436
410
Lmao speaks volumes about the firm if the trainees don't bother applying for an NQ role
432
416
Lucky escape for those 6 I would say.