Acumen+giving+you+the+edge

Shoosmiths starts hiring trainees again

15 March 2010 | By Corinne McPartland

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Related Articles

Shoosmiths has reopened its trainee ­recruitment programme after last year emerging as the only major firm to ­withdraw training contract offers from future joiners.

The national firm caused controversy when it asked its September 2009 intake to either defer their start dates or withdraw their training contracts. The firm offered no compensation in return.

HR director Louise ­Hadland commented: “The firm took 12 trainees in ­September 2009 from a group of 20. Eight are due to join us this September and we anticipate business demand will see us ­requiring more.

“The difference will be made up from the original 2010 intake.

“This in turn leaves us needing more in 2011, which is why we’re starting a recruitment drive to cover the 2011 shortfall, plus the new 2012 intake.”

When the firm withdrew its training contracts two future joiners, Tom Goff and George Roberts, wrote an open letter to The Lawyer’s sister magazine Lawyer 2B defending the firm.

While this made the pair the butt of a flurry of abuse and ridicule, Shoosmiths’ chief executive at the time Paul Stothard refused to defend them publicly, although he did stand by the firm’s decision not to offer any compensation to ­deferring trainees.

See all Related Jobs, Briefings & CPD/Events

Readers' comments (5)

  • IHateBPP | 15-Mar-2010 10:35 am

    Nobody could be so desperate for a training contract that they would work at Shoosmiths.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 15-Mar-2010 2:02 pm

    Agree with the comment above - I would never in a million years consider applying there now. They appear to have no respect for the future employees of the practice.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 16-Mar-2010 4:50 pm

    I am considering applying to this firm but unsure after reading about how these trainees have been treated. It looks like this turn around in policy might have been a good thing but wonder how the eight trainees who did not have their contracts moved forward feel??? Did the eight who did not have their contracts move get compensated in the end???

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Pearl Graham | 17-Mar-2010 10:04 pm

    We seem to live in an era where we want something for nothing - pray tell, why should those trainees be compensated? a law firm is like any other business which must sometimes make unpopular decisions to remain a viable entity. In this economic climate, Shooosmiths' prudent decision not to pay compensation but to leave moneys in the pot to shore-up their balance sheet means there can be a future for existing employees as well as future employees. I certainly would not want to work for a company that had no regard for the security of their existing staff!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 18-Mar-2010 5:46 pm

    You mean to say that letter written by Tom Goff was genuine and not an April Fool's joke? Surely no would-be trainee would ever be so incredulous to genuinely believe the words associated with his name in that letter.

    Even the high-Chief didn't come out and give him the thumbs up.

    One of the comedic highlights of last year....Thank you for that trip down memory lane.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

  • Print
  • Comments (5)

Most popular

Most commented

Most emailed