Do you agree?
A Reddit user who claims to be a future trainee solicitor at a top US law firm in London has taken to the platform to share a set of “ground rules” for wannabe lawyers sliding into their LinkedIn DMs for application advice.
Posting under the username WorryBackground7075, the soon-to-be rookie said they “generally don’t mind giving a hand” to aspiring trainees, but noted that “the way some approach it is incredibly grating”.
They then set out a list of dos and don’ts for students hoping to tap up trainees for help. The first rule was not to expect free proofreading, with the poster saying they would not read an entire application for someone they did not know, emphasising “I don’t know you from Tom, Dick or Harry” and that such requests were something they would “probably only do” for close friends.
Another pet peeve was applicants fishing for insider intel on interview assessments. “Do not ask if I can give you the questions for video interviews or similar,” they write. “Not only is that dishonest and gives you an advantage over other candidates, but there is no guarantee that the questions will be the same as previous cycles (and in all likelihood, they will be different). In any case, do you expect me to remember three questions I was asked from a VI I did over a year ago?”
They also criticised those seeking off-the-shelf application answers, recounting that some have asked: “why did I want to be a trainee solicitor at [my firm]”. According to the future trainee, “These answers should be personal to you, so thinking that my motivation is going to make your application sound genuine and effective is shortsighted.”
But the behaviour that pisses them off the most is a lack of basic manners.
“If you ask someone for help and they respond, thank them.” they stressed. “I have people ask me questions and I send a nice response, and they say nothing back. I’m under no obligation to help you, so if I do take the time out of my day to respond, the least you can do is send a thank you. It’s rude and inconsiderate to say nothing.”
Signing off, the poster added: “If at least one person takes heed of this advice, I will consider this post successful.”
The post attracted a predictably lively comments section. One user replied with a healthy dose of sarcasm, mimicking the very LinkedIn behaviour the OP was complaining about by asking why they applied to their firm and which standout qualities drew them in. They also said they were “really curious” to hear about teamwork under pressure, insisting of course that this was for “personal interest” rather than to pinch lines for their own applications.
Others turned their attention to the wider culture of trainee recruitment. One commenter questioned the trend of plastering “future trainee” across LinkedIn profiles, calling it “a damn weird flex” and suggesting that keeping one’s current job title visible might help avoid being deluged with messages from complete strangers.
There were also users who said they simply could not believe how brazen some applicants had become. One said they would never randomly message someone and demand help, noting that any outreach they had made was limited to people they had met at events, and even then only after guidance had been offered first.
Another commenter chimed in with their own gripe about unsolicited connections, asking whether “random aspiring trainees” with no shared background could stop adding them without even a personalised note. They added that they were more than happy to help those who could, at the very least, be “bothered to attach a short message” with their invite.
(
(
