The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
A couple of interview observations
Poast new message in this thread
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:29 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Yeah, I retired, but am back for a post after doing a bunch of interview-related tasks over the last couple months.
1. Contrary to popular belief, it's perfectly ok to ask about hours on a callback if you do it in a smart way. Asking "So will I really have to work weekends?" is bad not because the topic is inappropriate but because it makes you look like a moron. Asking what a particular junior associate's schedule is like or what the differences are between certain departments is perfectly ok and probably a pretty sensible thing to do. I mean, that's a big deal once you actually start working.
2. I know these are stock questions, but questions about early responsibility and client contact usually sound really fake. A lot of the people who ask them don't seem to know what either of these buzzwords actually mean and sometimes don't seem to listen to the answers to them. Why not ask your individual interviewers what kind of tasks they do? The answers will probably be a lot more interesting, and you'll probably hear different responses from people at different levels of seniority.
3. Touching on the point above, if you ask a question you should at least pretend to be listening to the answer.
4. Questions about training are fine. For whatever reason, very few people seem to ask about how assignments are given out or how people are placed in departments. That stuff kind of matters once you start working, and it's odd that no one seems to pay attention to it.
5. Corporate associates don't expect you to know what mezzanine financing is, or whatever. Most of us didn't understand the differences among specialties when we interviewed either. If you do have a lot of background by all means let it be known, but you don't have to pretend that you've wanted to do structured finance all your life. It's probably good to know if you're more interested in transactional work or litigation, but I don't think anyone expects more than that of a 2L (I think 3Ls are epected to be a little more confident about what they want to do, as they've had the benefit of more experience).
6. You know how you hate it when your interviewer doesn't really talk to you and makes you do all the work? Interviewers don't like having to do all the work either. People at lunch understand that you might have had all of your questions about the firm answered, but try to hold up your end of the conversation. If you can't find any common non-law related topics, asking about finding apartments, neighborhoods, bar trips, etc. can fill time.
7. Unless someone at lunch is in a hurry, order an appetizer. If you don't get something, the rest of the table will feel obliged to pass too because it's awkward to eat when someone doesn't have food. Don't worry about budget stuff when you're ordering. We wouldn't have picked this restaurant if we were worried.
8. If someone asks you what other firms you're looking at or whether this is the beginning or the end of your interviewing season, it's not meant to be an interrogation. It's usually just a throwaway question at the beginning of the interview, meant to fill time or give the interviewer time to think of a question. The answers aren't that important. I mean, we could probably guess which other firms you're looking at. They're the same ones we were interviewing at when we were in law school.
9. When asking how social the firm is, remember your source. You're going to get very different answers from partners, older married associates, and young single associates. A firm isn't antisocial just because that 6th year with a picture of his kids on his desk says he never goes out with coworkers.
10. This is specific to the New York market: it's really enough just to say that you enjoy the city or that you think the best transactional work is here. This isn't a market that's picky about connections, so you don't need to invent a tie to the city to get an offer.
EDIT:
11. Have an interest section on your resume. I know, it's a little lame. I thought it was lame too. But interviews take half an hour and lunch often takes two hours, and you can only get so much milage out of someone's qualifications. Your hobby or your last vacation are probably a lot more interesting than a lot of the things on your resume, and in most cases I'm trying to judge your maturity and ambition and ability to act like a normal human being as much as your grades and your work experience. |
 |
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:31 PM Author: Histrionic Sandwich Degenerate Thank you, this really helped. We miss ya Rowan! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218616) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:35 PM Author: Multi-colored Personal Credit Line This is extremely good information. Too late for the current crop of 2Ls, but this should be bumped next september. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218633) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:38 PM Author: 180 misunderstood range No, Meanest Fish is callbacking in NY this week. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218645) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:10 PM Author: Blathering Mustard Puppy Good advice Rowan. Especially about the interest section. It's the conversation-starter section and it's really annoying when people leave it out. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219621) |
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:30 PM Author: Brindle cerebral piazza hi friend (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218613) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:33 PM Author: Multi-colored Personal Credit Line Hi Rowan. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218622) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:33 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife This is all good advice.
Also, hey Rowan! I'm here too despite retirement. Oh well.
And I don't know what mezzanine financing is either. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:34 PM Author: Histrionic Sandwich Degenerate We know you all still lurk. It's ok, admitting to it is the first step in true recovery. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218626) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:36 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Admitting it by posting here doesn't seem like a step toward recovery. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218637) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:35 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker This place really is an addiction.
I'm not sure I want to know what it means.
How have you been? |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:36 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Good. Busy, but not unbearable, and the work is interesting. You? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218635) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:37 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Same here. I had a slow period, but now things are busy again. It's been pretty enjoyable so far, not nearly as bad as people made it out to be. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218638) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:38 PM Author: Violent sneaky criminal (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218646) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:40 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife You're not totally wrong. There's analytical/creative work: there's securities law research and analysis, I think drafting is more than "filling in the blanks," and diligence can inform deal structure, drafting issues, negotiation, etc. But, as a first-year corporate associate, there's a lot of boring diligence, a lot of copying precedents, and a lot of making deal team lists.
I haven't been at my firm long enough to give you a better answer. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:41 PM Author: Violent sneaky criminal (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218664) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:42 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Yes, there's a lot of diligence. There's also a lot of checking documents for blanks and inconsistencies, and making small edits. Sometimes you'll manage a closing room, which is basically being organized and making sure everything gets there in time. However, as rk said, sometimes drafting involves a lot more than just fiddling with a couple of words. There are smaller deals and more minor portions of deals where you can have a bigger role, and if you do a good job with your diligence and filling-in-the-blanks you'll be more likely to get the more desirable kinds of work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218668) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:44 PM Author: Violent sneaky criminal cool, thanks to you as well (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218674) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:34 PM Author: green temple This thread would have been helpful a week or two ago. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218629) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:36 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I had to do some interviews before I had any thoughts on them. I guess it's meant more for next year's class than this year's. Or maybe it's just a bunch or random thoughts. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218636) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:37 PM Author: charismatic toilet seat whorehouse Go away you TTT. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218640) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:37 PM Author: charcoal space old irish cottage What's your take on throwing the dice, and moving to NYC from CA to find work before establishing some leads (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218642) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:40 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker If you want to do that, make sure you have several month's living expenses saved up and a definite location where you can sleep until you have a job. Taking risks is cool, but you don't want your move to New York to turn into a brief trip because you ran out of money. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218654) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:37 PM Author: 180 misunderstood range this is very helpful Rowan. Thanks! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218643) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:45 PM Author: sexy spectacular hall Why is asking if you have to work weekends make you look like a moron? Because it should be assumed? I thought instead of "moron," you were going to write "lazy." (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218683) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:49 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Because it should be assumed.
Seriously, interviewers know that you're human, you're a student, and you don't want to work all the time. So if you ask "how bad are the hours really?" (perhaps phrased just a tiny bit more diplomatically), we'll give you an answer and not hold it against you. But if you ask a question that makes it sound like you have no idea what a law firm is -- "do you ever work past 6?" or "do you ever work weekends?" then we'll think that we shouldn't hire you. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:49 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Yeah, I think that if you're interviewing at any firm that's considered to be biglaw, you should assume that you'll occasionally have to put in some time on the weekends. If you think your workweek will always end on Friday, it suggests that you haven't put in much thought about your choice of a career.
This might be specific to me, but I'd mind a moron far more than someone who wanted to have some time for a personal life. I mean, it's not like anyone at the firm actually likes working on weekends. We just realize that sometimes it's necessary. We expect that you'll know that too and be willing to do your fair share. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:54 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend do you expect to stay with the firm if you could or eventually move to other options with better QOL? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218729) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:58 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I'm not sure yet, I'll look around in a few years and see if the lifestyle still works for me. I think it's probably a lot harder on parents than on young people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218742) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:04 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend the thing that gets me is the hours don't really get better as you rise through the ranks, even as a partner
therefore, its not a matter of having little time for a couple of years, but having little time for the entirety of your career, which is the majority of the prime of your life
I mean, if the work really fulfilled me and I was truly into it regardless of pay (as some entrepreneurs are), the hours would be bearable, but if Im working just for my paycheck, it doesnt seem so worthwhile |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:07 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker There are jobs in law that have hours that are somewhat lighter than biglaw, and many associates will end up in those jobs.
But if you really don't think you can work later than 6 pm on a regular basis, you probably should think about that very seriously when making choices about your career. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:10 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend yeah but Im wondering what persuaded people like you to accept the long hours? Is it just the money in the end or lack of other more fulfilling options?
|
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:12 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Because most of the jobs that get out at 6 pm either don't pay well, don't sound very appealing, or don't fit my abilities and talents.
Also, I would vastly prefer a job where I could come in at 10 am than one where I could go home at 6 pm. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:15 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay What do you do to stay alert all those hours? I found that this summer I was drinking ~6 cups of coffee throughout the day just so I would be in top form (read: alert) throughout, and I averaged 9-10 hour days which is obviously no big deal. I was stunned at how many associates didn't drink coffee at all though. Then again, this was a non-NY (though major-market Vault) firm that seemed to, perhaps rightfully, pride itself on QOL to a certain extent. Now that I'm going to NY, I'd like to know. I'm just planning on drinking around ten cups a day, but I'd imagine people do crazier (and less crazy) things. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218838) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:16 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend sleep early is prob the key i'd imagine (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218847) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:18 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay I went to bed pretty early, and I found the coffee really more useful later on in the day after I had been working on a matter non-stop for most of the day and just felt less efficient, but I did always kick off my day with a few cups anyway. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218863) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:18 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker No, not really. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218864) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:19 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend what time do you usually go to bed? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218883) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:21 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Usually somewhere between 12 and 1:30. I don't get up until 8:15, so it's not like I need to go to bed at 10 to get my rest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218893) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:24 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend ok, that gives one a bit more free time I guess (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218920) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:19 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Diet coke is the official drink of biglaw.
It's not really that hard to stay awake for 12 hours. You do that in your daily life. It's more how to pay attention to work for a reasonable percentage of that time, which you can do by taking little breaks and just getting used to the schedule.
Working until 4 am is difficult, but you handle that the same way you would an all-nighter - caffeine and deadline pressure. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:19 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay So no coffee for you either then? Do you mean cocaine? Heh. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218882) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:21 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I loathe coffee, but obviously lawyers love that too. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218897) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:26 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay I am a Diet Coke drinker, but I started drinking coffee last year b/c of my Con Law class. I use Diet Coke more to maintain a "baseline" level of caffeine fix, and coffee to "spike" me up into that hyper-aware/active level. It's really a pathetic addiction at this point (though I haven't been drinking much coffee this year, and have felt the effects).
I'm sure I'll be drinking tons of coffee next year as well when I'm working. Thank God it's so good for you. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: Snowy Boyish Menage Ladyboy Have you considered the fact that you likely are unable to stay aware all day without caffine because you have a dependence on caffine?
|
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:22 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay Yes, I've actually considered that a lot this year. It's not so much that I'm useless without caffeine, just that it gives me a nice spike and gets me to where I like to be energy-wise for an extended period of time. But I drink coffee maybe once a week now at most because of what you just mentioned, though I have tossed around the idea of just saying "fuck it" and drinking it like crazy every day just so I can be more productive. Since I'm a 3L and accepted an offer, it's not that big of a deal right now, but when I'm starting out I'll probably drink it at least for a while just b/c I want to be at that "peak" level. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219685) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:32 PM Author: Snowy Boyish Menage Ladyboy Do you get tired now or just when you need to work for a long time? If just when you are working, I think you probably is just that you do not like what you are doing. When I am working, it is much more likely that it will be 7 and I will say that I wonder where the time has gone as opposed to it being 2 and longing for the day to be over. But, I generally am interested in what I am doing. The one document review thing that I have needed to do was really short, a couple hours for a few days, and it was torturous. I was bored, tired, whatever. I think I would go crazy if I needed to do corporate work. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220040) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:35 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay I have noticed a but of general sluggishness which I attribute to my caffeine addiction most likely, but I find it pretty easy to get interested in things when I'm working in earnest, though even in my summer work I absolutely have noticed the phenomenon you're talking about. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220052) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:39 PM Author: Snowy Boyish Menage Ladyboy So, your answer is to get more interesting work, not to drink more coffee. And, whatever you do, don't do corporate work, because you will be asleep by noon if you need to spend your day correcting typos. In litigation you are thinking, and trying to figure things out and form arguments. At least for me, it is relatively enjoyable. And, if you don't you should also stay hydrated and exercise. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220077) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:41 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay Well I'm just a 3L right now. Stop trying to talk me into healthy habits, God damn it . . . it's coffee and cocaine for me, all the way to the top!
Points well taken though. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:44 PM Author: Snowy Boyish Menage Ladyboy Cocaine? I thought you were planning to work in a major market? Only meth can really give you the energy that you need if you really want to get ahead. Just need to learn how to keep billing through the post-high letdown. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220101) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:28 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend ugh, I find diet soda repulsive
I dont know how anyone can enjoy it |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:02 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school I think I'll stick to a QOL firm (get out at 7, rarely work weekends; yes, these firms to exist, i know a few people that work in them) in a non-NY market, probably DC or Chicago. Life, family and friends are too important for me to give up for some extra bonus money and a prestige star on my resume. Still get the 125K, but at least there i can enjoy it. Makes no sense to burn 3 years of my life, knowing that I would probably end up at such a firm anyways after hating and regretting going to NYC biglaw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219207) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:25 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker That's fine, I certainly respect that choice. If anything, I think law students should think about such matters a lot more before they start the interviewing process. I'm certainly aware that there are QOL firms out there - I'm a little skeptical about anything that pays market and claims to be a lifestyle firm, but there several I know of htat pay slightly below market.
It's not all about prestige or money,though - I think that oversimplifies things. Some of it is about market choice, speciality choice, and career goals. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:52 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school definitely...
market choice: only problem you'll have is if you want to go to NYC; every other city gives you a solid opportunity at finding a BIGLAW QOL firm.
specialty choice: again that pretty much relates to market choice. That is, if you want to go into corporate stuff, NY is the place, and that has all of the QOL implications that we've talked about.
career goals: if it's to become partner, you probably will have no chance at partner at one of those NYC BILAW firms. Most likely will have to lateral over to another firm in hopes that you could become partner at the new firm.
Actually, from what I've gathered from people at QOL firms, is that they often prefer to go to people that have been there from the beginning for partner positions.
As far the market compensation, yes, some QOL firms may pay slightly below market after the first couple of years (165 vs. 175), but FOR ME, a few thousand dollars aint worth my extra free time and happiness. Also, if I do decide to bill lots of hours, above and beyond the average, my work will be recognized and appreciated and not merely expected. I rather pace myself towards partnership, and peak when I can, rather than trying to sprint towards it and burn out.
It's not all about Vault and Prestige; beyond these lawyer skills that one has gathered, there is an actual human being inside that body. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:07 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Again, I think it's a perfectly reasonable decision on your part, given your goals. I just don't like it when people with an inclanation towards a particular type of work have a one-sided view of it. I think that contributes to the negative "Biglaw is wonderful" v. "Biglaw is hell" vibe around here. In reality, it's neither.
I'm sure you realize that some people have personal or professional reasons for wanting for work in certain markets (or, again, certain specialities - there's a component of that choice that's independent of market as many firms simply don't have a lot of work in certain specialties) and that many people have no interest in being a partner at any firm, just as I realize that many people prefer to work in other markets and trade off some money for some free time in the first years of their career. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:36 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic These limp arguments are similar to the arguments people give for going to a lower ranked school. ("I'm going to end up happy and well-off, so shove it.")
Going into NY biglaw will give you the training, the experience, and the prestige that will make your other options easier. The line on the resume with NYC biglaw is going to carry you.
"[F]rom what I've gathered from people at QOL firms, is that they often prefer to go to people that have been there from the beginning for partner positions."
I don't know what the truth is, but it's not surprising they tell you that.
"some QOL firms may pay slightly below market after the first couple of years"
You're on deluding yourself if you think it is 'slightly' below market. It's not.
Check out the law.com mid-level associate survey. We're not talking about a few thousand... and the difference in hours is not what you might think.
If you can't hack it in Biglaw, we believe you. Just stop making excuses. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:05 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school I have no doubt that I could handle NYC BIGLAW hours, but I just have no desire to do so. Rather go to a DC or Chicago QOL BIGLAW place, like Sutherland in DC for example.
I'm sorry if you've been bitten by the prestige bug. Hope you'll remember this conversation when you get an assignment at 6pm, due at 9am the next morning.
You should take another look at that midlaw survey.
BTW, all I'm trying to do is add some balance to the overwhelming, closed-eye, race towards NYC BIGLAW prestige on this board. Might be helpful, for some, to think about it a bit more before making such an important decision.
Also, you're analogy to the lower ranked school ain't working. The reason to go to law school, in general, is to have as many solid employment options as possible at graduation (ie: "exit options"). Exit options being the key, going to the highest ranked school makes some sense.
The same cannot be said for joining a law firm, at least not for me. I'm not going to a job already thinking about a way to get out of it. If all you care about is the ability to parachute your way out of a job with horrible hours, then yes, the prestige advantage of going to a V20 NYC firm over a V100 QOL DC firm might give you a slight advantage for a lateral move. But again, this is not how I plan on choosing a firm. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:07 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay I think Rowan actually presents a balanced view overall. You're just balancing out the "NYC Biglaw is the only way to go!" view with a similarly one-sided perspective it seems. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219921) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:12 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school I agree, Rowan does present a good view. I'm just introducing the other possibility in hopes of creating a balance. but i get ur point. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219943) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:04 PM Author: sexy spectacular hall That sucks that you regularly worked 10 hours a day as a summer associate. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220202) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:01 PM Author: sexy spectacular hall Fair enough (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218750) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:49 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend thank you, Ms. Rowan (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218707) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:52 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend to rk982 and Rowan, what do you guys think about the hours? We had a conference with some biglaw associates recently at my school and they mentioned their hours as being around 9am - 8pm, that sounds like almost no time for a life.
do the hours just sound bad but are alot more bearable when you're actually working them or are they really bad? Another issue with the hours they brought up is not that they're long but that they're very unpredictable, comments? |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:56 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife 9am-8pm sounds pretty light to me, honestly. That gives you weeknights and a weekend for having a life. My hours probably average slightly longer than that. The unpredictability is, in fact, worse than the length; you can minimize that in some practice areas (litigation is more predictable than M&A, trusts and estates is more predictable than anything, etc.). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218735) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:07 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend do you plan on making partner or going out atsome point for better QOL opportunities?
I just find it hard to understand how people treat the long hours so nonchalantly. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:13 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school "9am-8pm sounds pretty light to me"
no wonder people burn out after 3 years and start looking for those "exit options", ie: QOL firms.
yea, yea, we know...the real reason u leave is because making partner at the firm is nearly impossible, not because the hours are horrible, the culture is cut-throat, and that you're still sharing an office as a third year. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:17 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend "9am-8pm sounds pretty light to me"
yeah that really scares me, the nonchalant treatment of those grueling hours
|
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:23 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I understand why people are frightened of working until midnight or on weekends, but I find it a little odd that people find 9-8 so terribly objectionable. Much of the world works 9-6 or 8-6. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218914) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:25 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah. The norm in NY biglaw seems to be somewhere from 10-8 to 10-10. This takes some getting used to, but you do in fact get used to it and it's not that horrible. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218927) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:29 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend well, 10 - 8 is not so bad I guess, since thats like to 9 - 7
but you said 9 - 8 is not so bad |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 9:16 PM Author: Lascivious Abode Gaming Laptop see for me, this is the confusion
the difference between 10-8 and 10-10 is absolutely HUGE
10-8 is:
leave, go home, relax a bit, read / exercize / eat / do menial chores, sleep a good 8 hours, recharge...
then on the weekends you can go out a bit even if u need to work somewhat
10-10:
get home absolutely exhausted, shower, flop on the television because your brain is fried, eat some doritos, crash, repeat
if you do that saturday too, that's hell
40 - cakewalk 50 - on the easier side 60 - not EASY, but you're young, its life 70 - pretty fucking bad, burnout after a few years and really pathetic xoxo posts about having no life or friends... 80+ - after a few months: coke addiction / mental breakdown
so saying... like (oh between 60-75) is a pretty big fucking gap to me. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:27 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend isn't it 9-5?
in which case the difference is alot greater, that's 3 WHOLE extra hours a day
if it's 9-6, that 2 hours a day is still a pretty hefty difference between having the opportunity to do things you'd like (read books, watch tv, hang out with friends, play video games and sports) versus not being able to do alot of things you enjoy |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:29 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I don't know anyone in a standard office job who goes home at 5 anymore, and many businesses expect their employees to be there before 9. 9-5 isn't even an 8 hour day if you take a lunch break.
You'll still have time to read books, watch TV, hang out with friends, and play video games if you work until 8. You'll probably have to play sports on the weekends. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:32 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend what do you think of going in-house for a corporation? does that sound like a good option, are their chances for growth? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218986) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:34 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker That's certainly an option that I'd consider in the future. But don't kid yourself that that's going to be a 9-5 job either. Very few jobs are, and even fewer that involve practicing law.
If you really need to be home by 5 pm, the white collar job I can think of immediately might be teaching. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:35 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife As a junior associate, that won't be an option for a while.
The in-house people I meet seem to be a mixed bag. Some have terrible boring jobs; some do great corporate work. But the people who have interesting in-house jobs (a) work long hours and (b) spent a long time at good law firms before going in-house. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:31 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Few professional jobs are 9-5 or even 9-6. If you want to work 9-5 you can probably get a job as a secretary at a law firm. The pay isn't terrible, and the hours are pretty stable. But you're extremely unlikely to get a legal or other professional job that's uniformly 9-5, though you can of course come closer in other jobs than you would in biglaw.
Biglaw has its perks though. Cars home, meals, secretaries, Blackberries, etc., actually do make it easier for you to work long hours. And with the salary you can afford other conveniences (doorman buildings, sending out laundry, cleaning services, restaurants). I find that less of my time outside of work is spent on errands than it was in law school or my clerkship, so I'm not losing as much free time as my hours might suggest. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:34 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend I heard a horrible anecdote about blackberries from the biglaw people who talked at my school
its basically the leash which the firm ties onto you so you're even 'oncall' on the weekends |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:35 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Yes, it's a leash in some ways. But it also prevents you from wasting hours in the office because you're waiting for someone to send you an email, and lets you slip out to do errands if you have downtime. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219010) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:36 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yes, that is of course true. However, if you didn't have a blackberry, you'd also be on call all weekend. No partner is going to say "boy, it's Saturday, we can't find associate X, I guess we'll just have to wait until Monday to give him any work." The blackberry makes it possible for you to leave the office without worrying that you're missing important emails. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219017) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:42 PM Author: big-titted arousing giraffe school A blackberry is a perk for the firm, basically a leash to tie ur neck around. the amazing thing is that theyve got incoming lawyers thinking that it's a perk for them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219066) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:51 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife I am quite sure it's a perk for me. If I didn't have a blackberry I'd spend a lot more time at the office. I realize that it also benefits the firm, but the firm/associate relationship is not zero-sum. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219134) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:57 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic "A blackberry is a perk for the firm, basically a leash to tie ur neck around. the amazing thing is that theyve got incoming lawyers thinking that it's a perk for them."
It is definitely a perk. Talk to associates from the pre-blackberry world. A Blackberry means someone does not need to hang around waiting for an email that might never come.
Here's an idea... try working for a law firm before proclaiming you know everything about it.
Here's another thought... the more efficient an associate the more profit for the firm. Surely there is some relationship between associate pay and the ability to pay. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:57 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I'm not sure why you think that getting out at 8 pm prevents you from having a life. If you decide to live an hour and a half away, you're probably screwed, but someone who lives reasonably close to work will still have time to go do things afterwards. If you're in a major city, many people won't have eaten by 8 so you can go out to dinner with friends. There's certainy plenty of time to go to a bar or a movie, or go home and relax for a few hours before bed.
The hours in corporat tend to be quite unpredictable. Things come up at the last minute, sometimes you have to cancel plans. I think it goes more smoothly if you explain your schedule to people before you start working. Supposedly litigation is more steady. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 12:59 PM Author: black police squad to rk and Rowan: my UG was Duke, for which the most notable thing was basketball. I hate basketball.
is there a way to avoid questions about it, or at least ways to steer the conversation away quickly without seeming like a bitter/negative ass? |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:01 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Laugh, make an approving comment about the athletic culture, and then mention something else about the school you loved. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218753) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:39 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend Or preempt. I have the FSU/UM degrees, and I *hate* football. Everyone used to ask me about it, until I put other things on my resume that they were more likely to ask about. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219045) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:40 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker That's another good strategy. If your resume has enough interesting "soft" topics on it, people are unlikely to bother you about sports. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219055) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:45 PM Author: black police squad yeah, that's comforting. between my activities and my "interests" line, I hope I can cover the small-talk stuff (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219094) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:46 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Yeah, I just added an edit about that. I think the interests line should definitely be done, to give your interviewer an opportunity to make small talk. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219100) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:59 PM Author: black police squad yeah. I was a little skeptical at first. but I've shown my resume to fewer than 15 associates/partners, and two have mentioned that they like my interests (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219185) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah, I'm a big fan of the interests line. Biglaw interviews are boring, nobody cares that you were a paralegal or class president or whatever, but some interests can make it more fun for the interviewer, which can't hurt you. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219417) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:35 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend And more fun for the interviewee! Nonspecific questions are often really darned boring. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219426) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:38 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Exactly. I think the one thing I never realized as an interviewee was that the interviewer might find this process a little dull as well. It's painfully boring to talk about a non-descript internship someone had five years ago. Obviously that stuff needs to be on the resume to show people you're qualified, but I don't think it makes good conversation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219445) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:45 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah, honestly, if you go to a decent law school, that's the qualification. Other than your 1L summer job, or pre-law finance work, nothing else is actually going to be relevant for the job, so the interview is about keeping the interviewer entertained. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219492) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:49 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Even the 1L summer job can be something that's easily glanced over. Obviously there needs to be one and it's better if it's something that's either prestigious or interesting, but I don't think I ran into anyone whose 1L summer activities were below an acceptable standard. People with insufficient credentials generally don't make it to the callback stage. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219512) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:51 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah, I know, I just meant if you worked at a firm 1L summer that can be something to discuss to make you sound like a good law-firm candidate. But it doesn't help that much -- not as much as having something cool to talk about, anyway. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219521) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:53 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker That's true. I think it helps most in conversation if it's referenced as giving the interviewee more insight about the sort of practice area or market that might interest them. But you can only get so much out of that, and those lunches take forever sometimes. I think that's the actual hard part about a lunch - you have to get past your little 30 minute blurb and be reasonably good company for a longer period of time.
I also think the interest section helps you remember people a little better when you're evaluating someone. I can remember an unusual hobby or a good story a lot better than the fact that a person was in student government or something. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:52 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Hi! You're more addicted than we are. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219143) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:02 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend Yes. Sadly. I need to set my laptop up so it literally cannot access this site. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219210) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:20 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Me too. Was that thing I sent you of any use? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219322) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend Yes, immensely! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219397) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:32 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Good. I have some semi-relevant news for you if you're interested. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219407) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend I am, as always, very interested in all news, however relevant it may or may not be. :) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219422) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:44 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Emailed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219481) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:07 PM Author: stimulating stead organic girlfriend and replied! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219923) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:02 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend yeah, Im wondering to since I hate baseball, and being in boston means people will ask you about baseball
I hate saying that Im not into baseball cuz it makes me seem like a loser or something |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:06 PM Author: Galvanic Gaped Associate Office Subject: Always be positive Talk about the sport you do follow, then. Or your favorite summer activities. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218770) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:08 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Exactly. Announcing you don't like something doesn't win you any points, especially since your interviewer probably likes that thing. Trying to channel the conversation to something you do enjoy (for instance, if he follows other Boston-area sports teams) works a lot better. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218792) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:42 PM Author: impertinent rehab absy: I had the same problem since I'm at law school at a PAC-10 school that everyone recognizes as a football giant. I am sports retarded, but kept having to answer ice-breaker questions about football. I used to dodge the bullet by saying I knew virtually nothing about the team but then realized this was a major mistake: not only did I seem ignorant, but some sportspeople probably took me as condescending as well. In interviews, you never want to be negative, I find, so after a while I realized it was an advantage to be able to talk at least a little football. I forced myself to learn a respectable amount about the team: who the quarterback was, and who the next game was against. When it came up subsequently I was able to respond without a problem, and then swiftly move the conversation to topics I could more brilliantly glow. Takeaway? Learn a little bit, enough to engage someone who wants to chat for thirty seconds. It's unavoidable at a place like Duke, or my place, USC, and not having any knowledge just comes off as a little too eccentric...Good luck. PS: you don't have to bother picking up Sports Illustrated, just check ESPN.com and eyeball the rankings since that what most people care about. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:58 PM Author: black police squad thanks. I think a little bit of that, along with the interests line, should cover it (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219545) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:06 PM Author: wonderful slippery house Thanks for the advice! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4218771) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:42 PM Author: high-end theater stage fortuitous meteor Hey Rowie (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219067) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:45 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Hey there, how's it going? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219088) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:56 PM Author: high-end theater stage fortuitous meteor Not bad at all. Facing the realization that the real world is about to catch up with me. How are you doing? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219167) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:56 PM Author: Splenetic floppy incel preventive strike do you do evaluative interviews, or just lunch (or is lunch "evaluative?")
do you think a candidate should always order dessert or coffee?
|
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 1:59 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Lunch is evaluative at most firms. To the extent any associate interview is evaluative.
I generally oppose dessert or coffee, because associates are busy. You should play it by ear: if they encourage you to order dessert, or otherwise seem inclined to linger (it's Friday, etc.), order dessert, but my default would be no. But Rowan's right that the default is to order an appetizer and a main course. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:21 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Lunch is evaluated at every firm I know of. I've done both types of interviews.
I'd agree with rk that dessert/coffee should be left to the associates. Sometimes someone will need to hurry back, sometimes there will be time to sit around and talk. But you should get an appetizer, as the people who are with you will almost certainly want 2 courses at a minimum. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:28 PM Author: 180 misunderstood range Yes, but leaving dessert up to the associates, i've found, is very hard. Invariably, they are looking at me expectantly. When I say "I think i'm gonna skip dessert," half the people look relieved. The other half look somewhat disappointed. That being said, when the associates insisted on getting the cheesecake lollipops at David Bourke & Donatella, it turned out to be amazingly good. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219378) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah, associates need to be polite and leave it to you, but you should try to punt back to them, or at least say something like "are you sure you don't need to get back to work?" or whatever. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219393) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: 180 misunderstood range luckily I won't be doing this again anytime soon. i managed to do 11 callbacks and eat only 1 dessert. who needs the extra calories? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219419) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:30 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker You can always throw it back and ask them if they have time to stay late. I'd say that if no one has specified either an interest in dessert or a need to get back to work, you can err on the side of skipping it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219398) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 2:34 PM Author: overrated thriller rigor bawdyhouse Hi Rowan. Helpful advice as always, someone should be sure to bump this next OCI season as well. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:12 PM Author: apoplectic jade legal warrant nursing home I hate the "what other firms are you looking at?" question. Don't ask it. Name dropping firms is incredibly douchey. Alternately, if a person didn't do well at OCI and doesn't have a lot of callbacks, then the question is embarassing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219627) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:14 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I don't ask it personally since I know it freaks people out, though I have asked people vaguer questions like whether they'll be in town all week or something.
I just don't think there's really a reason to hate it as much as people do and wish that people wouldn't get so uncomfortable when someone else asks it. No one really cares what the answer is. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:22 PM Author: apoplectic jade legal warrant nursing home How do you know people don't care? I guarantee responses to that question are used to evaluate candidates. I'm not talking about how they handled that kind of a question either (did it fluster them?). I'm talking about the substantive answer they give to that question. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219686) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:24 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah, honestly, if it came up, and the person was like "you, [bad firm], [bad firm], and [bad firm]," it would affect my evaluation. "How did this guy get a callback with us?" I'll try not to ask this question, although it's usually something I'm curious about. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219691) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:36 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker But would it really surprise you? I mean, I guess I can often tell from the resume if the firm is a reach or a safety for someone. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220057) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:10 PM Author: Blathering Mustard Puppy The resume and how they are in the interview. Some people are just REALLY bad at interviewing. It can be downright painful at times.
The question comes up because there's only so much you can talk about with a nervous stranger during a 2-hour lunch. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:14 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I've been pretty lucky, but yeah, I've had a couple of painful ones. Even among the ok interviewers, it's not that hard to tell who's interested in a healthy way, who will take the first half-decent job they can get, and who is just in it to get free lunch.
Like I said, I don't ask it myself, but I totally see how it comes up. Not only do you run out of things to talk about sometimes (especially with the less talkative interviewees) but sometimes it's hard to start a casual but still professional conversation with a stranger. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:19 PM Author: Blathering Mustard Puppy Interviews are a lot like dates, some things are better left unmentioned. But I can see how it comes up. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220263) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:00 PM Author: green temple That's an obnoxious mindset. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220494) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:08 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Maybe a little. But things are proxies for other things. If someone's interviewing with my firm, presumably they want to work at a NY high-Vault firm, and if they don't have callbacks with other peer firms, it's likely because they did something wrong in their OCI or the other firms discovered a problem in their resume/transcript -- not because they had no interest in other similar firms. Or, if they did in fact have no interest in other similar firms, then they're probably not a good fit for us. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220531) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:21 PM Author: green temple It's more than just a little obnoxious. The candidate is there for two to three hours so that you and your fellow interviewers can draw your own conclusions on his qualifications. If instead it's going to be an inter-firm popularity contest, then why not just drop the pretense and ask candidates how many other callbacks they have before inviting them to a callback at your firm? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220622) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:34 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic The two or three hours do provide valuable feedback. However if someone is on the borderline (or even somewhat above the border) and it turns out that they are not interviewing at peer firms (or have already been dinged), ding them straight to hell (i.e., a lower ranked firm or another legal market).
It is silly to argue that the answer provides no useful evaluative information.
You should also note, idiot, that not everyone asks this question or even cares. There's no risk of this deingrating into an inter-firm popularity contest. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 6:49 PM Author: green temple I never suggested that the question is entirely irrelevant, shitface. What I challenge is the high significance that you and rk evidently ascribe to the answer. It's entirely apt to characterize your approach as a popularity contest. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220762) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:23 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic "if a person didn't do well at OCI and doesn't have a lot of callbacks, then the question is embarassing."
That's why it's a good question. If no other firm wants to give you a callback, we might as well ding you too. If you aren't interviewing at "peer" firms, I'm going to give you the thumbs down. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: apoplectic jade legal warrant nursing home Exactly, but it also makes the firm look like an insecure prestige whore. That's the trade-off I guess. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219696) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:25 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Yeah. It's groupthink, but so are most aspects of biglaw interviewing. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219698) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:19 PM Author: wonderful slippery house How should you handle drinks at lunch/dinner? Follow the associates' lead? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219668) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:20 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Don't drink. I almost never saw associates drink (they're going back to work). If they did, I'd consider it, but still probably not. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219676) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:30 PM Author: wonderful slippery house Makes sense, but it's surprising that associates or partners wouldn't have drinks at dinner. At least a glass of wine or something... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219723) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:32 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife I never had an interview dinner. At random on-campus group recruiting dinners I'd drink, though I only went to a couple of them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219733) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:32 PM Author: Flatulent field stain I've had drinks at dinner and received offers every time. Of course, everyone else at the table was drinking too.
Don't drink at lunch. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:23 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Don't drink at lunch. No one does.
If the associates order drinks at dinner, you may do the same. Drink less than they do. If they order a bottle of wine, have one glass. If they order diet cokes or water, do the same. Do not get drunk or even tipsy. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:02 PM Author: sexy spectacular hall When they invite you to a dinner and serve cocktails for a half hour before you sit down, I see no reason not to drink. I usually had 1 or 2 cocktails and then whatever wine they served at dinner. If you can't hold that amount, then of course don't drink it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220195) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:47 PM Author: rambunctious masturbator Thanks Rowan! Does it matter if you want to do litigation instead of transactional in terms of approach? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219835) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:14 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic If you want to go into litigation you should act like an asshole; if you want to do corporate you should like an MBA (i.e., blather mindlessly about win-win); if you want to do tax, you should bore; if you want to do labor law, you should be a gal. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219952) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:21 PM Author: mahogany idiotic lay To add a few:
If your friends and family say you should be a lawyer because you "love to talk" and are "really good at arguing," you should go into litigation.
If you had a lemonade stand when you were a kid, you should go into corporate.
If you have both, well, that's partner material right there. |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:26 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker A little? Skills like researching and writing memos are far more important to litigation than corporate work, if any discussion of strengths comes up. If you're interested in corporate work, you should at least feign interest in business. Don't say you want to do transactional work because you liked corporations. Those classes are useful, but don't give much of a picture of what the work actually is. Pro bono is a better question if you're talking to a litigator (they tend to do more, since it gets them useful experience) than a transactional person (who probably doesn't do as much and might feel awkward if you ask them what pro bono they've done). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220009) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 3:57 PM Author: Contagious saffron corner Thanks Rowan. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219877) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:13 PM Author: hot set Given that you're currently interviewing (right?), what qualifies you to speak on the perspectives of the interviewer? Just curious. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219948) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:22 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Because I'm an interviewer? Granted, this is limited to the perspective of a very junior associate as an interviewer, but at almost all firms you'll be interviewed by at least one person like me (if only at lunch). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219988) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:23 PM Author: hot set Oh, okay -- I thought you were looking for jobs still. Proceed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4219989) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:34 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Sorry, I should have given some background. I'm a first year associate in a large New York law firm, practicing corporatelaw. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220047) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:36 PM Author: green temple Does it bother you that it's only a matter of time before someone on this board recognizes you during an interview? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220055) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:38 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Interview season's done. I doubt people will remember me enough to be on the lookout for me next year. I guess it wouldn't bother me all that much if someone did as long as they didn't do something stupid. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220066) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:13 PM Author: Diverse double fault legend what would you consider something stupid? I'm just picturing in my head the hilarious pssiblities of you interviewing a fellow xoxo'er
btw, if I ever get interviewed by you, should I bring up xoxo? |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:16 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker As amusing as it might be to have such a conversation, hell no. Deny, deny, deny. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220247) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:19 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife I'm looking forward to having Rowan on the other side of me on a deal. "This purchase agreement is a TTT!" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220267) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:20 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Now THAT would be funny. There are enough prominent XOXO posters in New York to make the odds of being in a negotiation with one of us pretty good.
If your client gives in a term, can I teace it for being softbatch? |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:25 PM Author: Marvelous elite international law enforcement agency knife Rowan: "This indemnity provision is all wrong."
Rk: "Link?" |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:34 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker Rowan: "You're such an XYZ Company troll."
RK: "That's because they're my client." |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:38 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic Vault ranking? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220065) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:39 PM Author: Judgmental boistinker I'll pass on that one. Whenever I post about such things people get all threatening. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220075) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 5:06 PM Author: swashbuckling maniacal brunch psychic Okay, fair enough. Just post the name of the firm, then. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220207) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 4:44 PM Author: ebony alpha nice to see you back, however briefly! thanks for the advice. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4220102) |
|
Date: November 5th, 2005 9:20 PM Author: cracking sinister spot mad cow disease probably the most useful post ever (rowan's OP) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=292473&forum_id=2#4221924) |