OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
KMaine
Posts: 862
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:57 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby KMaine » Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:57 pm

Guy I know my age and with business experience did pretty well for himself. Grades were great as far as I know though (read top 5% at T-14). Even still, I think younger people similarly situated did even better. Keep in mind, people at NU don't tend to be in their 30s when they matriculate. I think hiring partners for the most part like people with 2-4 years work experience not because they have any particular expertise (apart from the IP crowd), but merely because they have shown that they now how to work for a living.
Last edited by KMaine on Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Leira7905
Posts: 384
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 9:42 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby Leira7905 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:03 pm

KMaine wrote:Guy I know with my age and business experience did pretty well for himself. Grades were great as far as I know though (read top 5% at T-14). Even still, I think younger people similarly situated did even better. Keep in mind, people at NU don't tend to be in their 30s when they matriculate. I think hiring partners for the most part like people with 2-4 years work experience not because they have any particular expertise (apart from the IP crowd), but merely because they have shown that they now how to work for a living.



So true. This is what I'm banking on....

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby JazzOne » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:04 pm

Stringer Bell wrote:The CSO director was a biglaw partner I believe as recently as four years or so ago and still has alot of contacts he keeps in touch with. He certainly could be feeding me a line of BS to make me feel better, but the mantra of "WE doesn't matter" on the surface seems tough to agree with given NU's placement. A couple of years ago NU had the lowest placement in the NLJ 250 of any school (EDIT: In the t14) and in the latest data they had the highest. I understand the flaws in relying on this data in totality, but it would be difficult to not draw a conclusion that employers like what NU grads are bringing to the table with their WE.

Perhaps employers are just keen to NU grads because NU is a terrific law school. In order to draw the conclusion you want, you would need data from more than one school. The data you're presenting could be interpreted as a successful curriculum at a rising school. For the record, I don't think WE is worthless, but I think it can be detrimental at some firms, particularly if they have a particular model of associate they are looking for.

Stringer Bell wrote:If they want people that can learn new skills, why would they not give a bonus to people that have demonstrated that ability in a professional environment as well as an academic environment?

I think that supports my point. Most biglaw firms don't take a lot of laterals. I don't think they want people who have already learned the skills. My impression is that each firm has a unique way of doing things, and since lawyers are insanely egotistical, they all think their way is the best way. They don't want someone with too many opinions. They want grunts who will get to work. They really don't need aspiring partners. Big firms are actually banking on most of the associates not making partner.

I'm sure there are some firms (just like there are some schools) that prefer to hire people with WE. However, I have also noticed a lot of arrogance in hiring partners, and the culture of big firms reminds me very much of a fraternity. Imagine trying to rush a frat senior year. That's what it's like interviewing with a big law associate who is younger than you are.

stevededalus
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby stevededalus » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:06 pm

Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

User avatar
Stringer Bell
Posts: 1923
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby Stringer Bell » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:07 pm

KMaine wrote:Guy I know with my age and business experience did pretty well for himself. Grades were great as far as I know though (read top 5% at T-14). Even still, I think younger people similarly situated did even better. Keep in mind, people at NU don't tend to be in their 30s when they matriculate. I think hiring partners for the most part like people with 2-4 years work experience not because they have any particular expertise (apart from the IP crowd), but merely because they have shown that they now how to work for a living.


I'm not disagreeing with this at all. Graduating at 33 with WE is different than graduating at 27-28 with WE for sure. But it does seem fairly evident that folks who are 28 with WE when they graduate have a leg up on people that are 25 with none.

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby JazzOne » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:08 pm

stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby ScottRiqui » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:11 pm

JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.


That's a good point - when it comes time to interview, I'll have to figure out how to subtly get across the fact that although I'm older and married, I don't have any kids and that the Navy has gotten me used to the idea of deploying on little to no notice! :lol:

User avatar
lolschool2011
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby lolschool2011 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:13 pm

JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


It is fair to say that this is a good idea.....

"Mr. Hiring Partner, being XX years old, which could be considered a bit unconventional relative to other recent LS grads, I want to assure you that, despite my family ties/obligations, I am fully committed and prepared (as is my family) for the time and travel requirements coming aboard this firm may require."

Blah Blah Blah.... but you know what I mean. Do you think it'll be a good idea to proactively address the age thing and that you're fully prepared to relive your 20's as far as bedtime and willingness to travel is concerned?

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby JazzOne » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:17 pm

lolschool2011 wrote:
JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


It is fair to say that this is a good idea.....

"Mr. Hiring Partner, being XX years old, which could be considered a bit unconventional relative to other recent LS grads, I want to assure you that, despite my family ties/obligations, I am fully committed and prepared (as is my family) for the time and travel requirements coming aboard this firm may require."

Blah Blah Blah.... but you know what I mean. Do you think it'll be a good idea to proactively address the age thing and that you're fully prepared to relive your 20's as far as bedtime and willingness to travel is concerned?

I wish I had more answers for you, but I'm a 2L, not a hiring partner. I can tell you my impressions, but I cannot say what works and what doesn't work. You definitely want to get across to interviewers that you understand and accept the rigors of the job. Apparently, I suck at interviewing, so I'll leave it to someone else to figure out exactly how to get that message across.

Edit: I'm so glad I'm done with the hiring process. Thank God that's over. Worst part of law school, by far.

User avatar
ScottRiqui
Posts: 3640
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 8:09 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby ScottRiqui » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:21 pm

lolschool2011 wrote:
JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


It is fair to say that this is a good idea.....

"Mr. Hiring Partner, being XX years old, which could be considered a bit unconventional relative to other recent LS grads, I want to assure you that, despite my family ties/obligations, I am fully committed and prepared (as is my family) for the time and travel requirements coming aboard this firm may require."

Blah Blah Blah.... but you know what I mean. Do you think it'll be a good idea to proactively address the age thing and that you're fully prepared to relive your 20's as far as bedtime and willingness to travel is concerned?


That might be your best shot. Employers are rightfully gun-shy about even the appearance of age discrimination during interviews, so they'll never come right out and ask if your familial obligations are going to interfere with their using you like a damp rag. Proactively (yet subtly) addressing their concerns without making them ask the question sounds like a smart move.

stevededalus
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 2:33 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby stevededalus » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:22 pm

JazzOne, given your experiences and the current hiring environment, would you do it all over again?

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby JazzOne » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:23 pm

ScottRiqui wrote:That might be your best shot. Employers are rightfully gun-shy about even the appearance of age discrimination during interviews, so they'll never come right out and ask if your familial obligations are going to interfere with their using you like a damp rag. Proactively (yet subtly) addressing their concerns without making them ask the question sounds like a smart move.

+1

User avatar
JazzOne
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2008 11:04 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby JazzOne » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:31 pm

stevededalus wrote:JazzOne, given your experiences and the current hiring environment, would you do it all over again?

That is so difficult to answer. I have learned so much in law school, and I am surrounded by smart people with an incredible work ethic. I love my classes and my classmates (for the most part). However, the hiring market is so horrible, that I don't think law school is worth the gamble. Even with a full scholarship, I still felt like I had taken on too much debt and put my family through too much for a slim shot at biglaw.

Prior to law school, I had no appreciation for my teaching job. I hated it every day. Now that I have some experience in another field, I realize how secure my old job was. I realize how easy it was and how reasonable the hours were. There are a lot of times I wish I could go back to the stress-free world of teaching. Two weeks off for Christmas and 3 months off for the summer: I'll never see that kind of vacation again as long as I'm a lawyer. There is no way I could have realized how good my job was without leaving it to experience something else.

So, from this side of the equation, law school seems like a poor investment. But there is no way you could have convinced me of that while I was teaching. Anything seemed better than teaching. Unfortunately, there are a lot of law grads (even from the T14) without any job at all. It never even occurred to me that such an outcome was possible. The legal market is a wreck. This is the worst time, possibly in the entire history of our nation, to go into law. I'm sorry that answer is so equivocal, but it's so hard to answer because I know the outcome of my story. I won the law school lottery. But LS grading is quite arbitrary, as is legal hiring, so things could have easily turned out differently for me. If I didn't have a biglaw job lined up for this summer, I would definitely regret coming to law school.

User avatar
lolschool2011
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby lolschool2011 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:40 pm

JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:JazzOne, given your experiences and the current hiring environment, would you do it all over again?

That is so difficult to answer. I have learned so much in law school, and I am surrounded by smart people with an incredible work ethic. I love my classes and my classmates (for the most part). However, the hiring market is so horrible, that I don't think law school is worth the gamble. Even with a full scholarship, I still felt like I had taken on too much debt and put my family through too much for a slim shot at biglaw.

Prior to law school, I had no appreciation for my teaching job. I hated it every day. Now that I have some experience in another field, I realize how secure my old job was. I realize how easy it was and how reasonable the hours were. There are a lot of times I wish I could go back to the stress-free world of teaching. Two weeks off for Christmas and 3 months off for the summer: I'll never see that kind of vacation again as long as I'm a lawyer. There is no way I could have realized how good my job was without leaving it to experience something else.

So, from this side of the equation, law school seems like a poor investment. But there is no way you could have convinced me of that while I was teaching. Anything seemed better than teaching. Unfortunately, there are a lot of law grads (even from the T14) without any job at all. It never even occurred to me that such an outcome was possible. The legal market is a wreck. This is the worst time, possibly in the entire history of our nation, to go into law. I'm sorry that answer is so equivocal, but it's so hard to answer because I know the outcome of my story. I won the law school lottery. But LS grading is quite arbitrary, as is legal hiring, so things could have easily turned out differently for me. If I didn't have a biglaw job lined up for this summer, I would definitely regret coming to law school.


Now here's a big question - one that has been heavily debated on TLS. Do you believe your JD will help in any considerable way if you decide to return to teaching? (higher salary/teaching position/etc)

Plan2008
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:18 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby Plan2008 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:40 pm

dj666 wrote:
NonTradHealthLaw wrote:Do y'all have houses you're trying to sell? Only looking in areas where commuting is doable?


This is another big issue. We own a house and don't exactly want to sell it at a loss. The rental market here is pretty undervalued, so it's kind of a lose-lose.


You only need to rent it for what you end up paying in housing costs to stary whole. Not sure where you live, but we own luxury vacation rentals and would just roll our own home into that bundle if we moved. We'd leave behind the furniture that was sturdy and/or didn't care about. and we could return and stay in our own home when visiting family and friends.

I think the real question is what will post grad look like? we own our own business and I coach little league, etc. How will life look at biglaw, competing with single twenty somethings.

Skyhook
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:30 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby Skyhook » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:44 pm

JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:JazzOne, given your experiences and the current hiring environment, would you do it all over again?

That is so difficult to answer. I have learned so much in law school, and I am surrounded by smart people with an incredible work ethic. I love my classes and my classmates (for the most part). However, the hiring market is so horrible, that I don't think law school is worth the gamble. Even with a full scholarship, I still felt like I had taken on too much debt and put my family through too much for a slim shot at biglaw.

Prior to law school, I had no appreciation for my teaching job. I hated it every day. Now that I have some experience in another field, I realize how secure my old job was. I realize how easy it was and how reasonable the hours were. There are a lot of times I wish I could go back to the stress-free world of teaching. Two weeks off for Christmas and 3 months off for the summer: I'll never see that kind of vacation again as long as I'm a lawyer. There is no way I could have realized how good my job was without leaving it to experience something else.

So, from this side of the equation, law school seems like a poor investment. But there is no way you could have convinced me of that while I was teaching. Anything seemed better than teaching. Unfortunately, there are a lot of law grads (even from the T14) without any job at all. It never even occurred to me that such an outcome was possible. The legal market is a wreck. This is the worst time, possibly in the entire history of our nation, to go into law. I'm sorry that answer is so equivocal, but it's so hard to answer because I know the outcome of my story. I won the law school lottery. But LS grading is quite arbitrary, as is legal hiring, so things could have easily turned out differently for me. If I didn't have a biglaw job lined up for this summer, I would definitely regret coming to law school.


It's tough to leave a steady-enough job, long holidays, with the possibility of tenure, take a slash in income, a wad of debt and then find that getting that dream-job is that much harder.
Problem is, as we are in the over 30's thread, how much later can we wait to make the career change? Finishing law school at 37 is undesirable, I can't see me delaying any longer - I set this plan in motion a while ago.

From previous postgrad studies and jobs, I'm used to long days, long weeks and working hard, mentally and physically. I hope that my efforts and aptitude ( :wink: but how could I know?) will put me near the top of the pile in my yeargroup. I can only hope that job market doesn't get any worse over the next three years.
Last edited by Skyhook on Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Skyhook
Posts: 322
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 11:30 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby Skyhook » Fri Jan 07, 2011 3:49 pm

Plan2008 wrote:You only need to rent it for what you end up paying in housing costs to stay whole.


There might be increased maintenance issues, rental agency fees, altered tax status, other costs...
And then you have the loss of one income that I'm sure wouldn't be covered by grants and loans!

a_evans89
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 4:04 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby a_evans89 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:01 pm

Jazz: Thanks for being so honest. I think I am going to tuck my tail between my legs and walk away from law school---if anyone needs a LGB in excellent shape or an unopened book of 10 PT's, I wont be needing them any longer...

To all the old school 0L's: Do responses like Jazz's make you at all nervous about your decision??

User avatar
lolschool2011
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby lolschool2011 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:03 pm

a_evans89 wrote:Jazz: Thanks for being so honest. I think I am going to tuck my tail between my legs and walk away from law school---if anyone needs a LGB in excellent shape or an unopened book of 10 PT's, I wont be needing them any longer...

To all the old school 0L's: Do responses like Jazz's make you at all nervous about your decision??


Did this really just happen ITT?

Edit: No it doesn't make me nervous... there's nothing new about any aspect of life/work not being guaranteed, regardless of what you do, pursue, etc. Survival of the fittest/strongest willed.

kopper
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 12:15 am

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby kopper » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:09 pm

lolschool2011 wrote:
JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


It is fair to say that this is a good idea.....

"Mr. Hiring Partner, being XX years old, which could be considered a bit unconventional relative to other recent LS grads, I want to assure you that, despite my family ties/obligations, I am fully committed and prepared (as is my family) for the time and travel requirements coming aboard this firm may require."

Blah Blah Blah.... but you know what I mean. Do you think it'll be a good idea to proactively address the age thing and that you're fully prepared to relive your 20's as far as bedtime and willingness to travel is concerned?


I think you can address this however I strongly recommend against ever telling anyone how old you are unless for some reason you think they may think you are substantially older than you actually are. And for females I would recommend not talking about kids. Interviewers cannot ask you your age and they can't ask if you are married, have kids, etc... Also be congnizant of the fact that if you say you graduated high school or undergrad in a certain year someone can generalize your age. Its not necessary information for an interview and can only work against you.

I do not have experience with the legal hiring process however substantial experience with hiring executives for Fortune 100 companies. The rule is simple don't offer information that you are not required to provide if you are not absolutely certain the information you are offering won't benefit your goal. I can assure you tellings someone how old you are will never get you a job. Its a bad idea.

User avatar
lolschool2011
Posts: 269
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 1:14 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby lolschool2011 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:12 pm

kopper wrote:
lolschool2011 wrote:
JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


It is fair to say that this is a good idea.....

"Mr. Hiring Partner, being XX years old, which could be considered a bit unconventional relative to other recent LS grads, I want to assure you that, despite my family ties/obligations, I am fully committed and prepared (as is my family) for the time and travel requirements coming aboard this firm may require."

Blah Blah Blah.... but you know what I mean. Do you think it'll be a good idea to proactively address the age thing and that you're fully prepared to relive your 20's as far as bedtime and willingness to travel is concerned?


I think you can address this however I strongly recommend against ever telling anyone how old you are unless for some reason you think they may think you are substantially older than you actually are. And for females I would recommend not talking about kids. Interviewers cannot ask you your age and they can't ask if you are married, have kids, etc... Also be congnizant of the fact that if you say you graduated high school or undergrad in a certain year someone can generalize your age. Its not necessary information for an interview and can only work against you.

I do not have experience with the legal hiring process however substantial experience with hiring executives for Fortune 100 companies. The rule is simple don't offer information that you are not required to provide if you are not absolutely certain the information you are offering won't benefit your goal. I can assure you tellings someone how old you are will never get you a job. Its a bad idea.


Doesn't everyone in the world put the date you graduated from UG on your resume? I think it's pretty easy to deduce how old any applicant is... there's no sense in trying to hide what's so easily ascertainable.

User avatar
homestyle28
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:48 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby homestyle28 » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:15 pm

lolschool2011 wrote:
a_evans89 wrote:Jazz: Thanks for being so honest. I think I am going to tuck my tail between my legs and walk away from law school---if anyone needs a LGB in excellent shape or an unopened book of 10 PT's, I wont be needing them any longer...

To all the old school 0L's: Do responses like Jazz's make you at all nervous about your decision??


Did this really just happen ITT?

Edit: No it doesn't make me nervous... there's nothing new about any aspect of life/work not being guaranteed, regardless of what you do, pursue, etc. Survival of the fittest/strongest willed.


+1 except for the darwinian mindset stuff at the end ;). If uncertainty about your future job prospects scares you then LS isn't for you, regardless of your age. 1) Go to the best law school you can (given your circumstances, debt, etc) 2) work as hard as you can 3) Hope for the best. But I think that last one applies to just about anything, no guarantees in this life sadly.

sarahh
Posts: 610
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby sarahh » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:23 pm

Skyhook wrote:
Plan2008 wrote:You only need to rent it for what you end up paying in housing costs to stay whole.


There might be increased maintenance issues, rental agency fees, altered tax status, other costs...
And then you have the loss of one income that I'm sure wouldn't be covered by grants and loans!


Selling is not always easy, depending on the market. What if it takes several months? You have to pay the mortgage and have no rental income. (Well, technically, you could rent it out and have it on the market, but I don't think that is appealing to potential renters or buyers.) I am curious if people who are planning to sell want to come back after school. I would like to, although obviously it depends on where I can find a job. So I feel it may be financially unwise to sell just to avoid the hassle of renting out my place for a few years. If I got a job elsewhere, then I would probably sell the place.

sbalive
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby sbalive » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:35 pm

I think I have a different perspective from JazzOne. I definitely believe that non-engineering work backgrounds helped people out in getting jobs, especially in terms of making the leap over others at firms. BUT -- the kind of work had an impact... the biggest advantage was to people who were paralegals and had actual law firm experience, in particular BigLaw. People I knew were able to far exceed their grades in terms of the firms they got. After that, business/finance seemed to help, but most people I know with that kind of background also seemed to have done well in terms of grades. Beyond that, it was really about interviewing and how you present yourself and your resume. Overall, the best interviewers I know did really well, mediocre interviewers did poorly, all relative to how they "should" have done based on grades.

So, it's basically a mixed bag. But, I really want to underline that I've met any number of people who started BigLaw careers > 30, and this includes non-engineers. (Full disclosure - I am an engineer... but a lot of people I meet are non-engineering, including former profs, teachers, musicians, etc.) That said, a lot of people in our age range are also looking for "lifestyle" firms and generally smaller firms that have fewer demands on schedules and are less impersonal. So, there's some self-selection at work. Also, I struggled to get above median, and I was gunning for a hard market, so I did whiff a lot -- and I don't know, maybe there could have been an age factor, but there were lots of reasons why I wouldn't have gotten a callback. I do know that every time I encountered an interviewer, at screening or callback, who was older when they started their career, they loved, loved, loved me... and they will go to bat for you come decision time either to give that CB or offer.

As I mention in my post upthread, if you want BigLaw, it's important to go to a law school where you can access lots of interviews who will take you seriously and consequently make it likelier to get that fit. Also, going to 1L receptions is huge -- you will actually physically see people whose career trajectories have been like yours, and see how you can fit in. Finally, socializing with classmates is a big deal, since you just get into a comfort zone that can help out with understanding if you'd be comfortable with that environment + being able to show your comfort level in interviews.

sbalive
Posts: 399
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: OLD SCHOOL (must be 30 and over ITT)

Postby sbalive » Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:40 pm

JazzOne wrote:
stevededalus wrote:Anybody have experience with employers for jobs other than big law? I can see why big law firms might prefer a 25-year-old single law grad over a 35-year-old parent, but what about government and nonprofit employers?

That's the other thing. Older applicants have more family ties. Big firms want employees that they can shit on. They want to tell you on Friday that you're leaving for New York in the morning, and they don't want to hear about the trip to the zoo your family has been planning for a month.

To answer the question, though, I have found public interest jobs to be ridiculously difficult to get. I can't even get an interview with PI employers because I have no PI work on my resume at all. They don't care at all that I'm at the top of my class and on law review.


As for the latter -- this was an obstacle for me even in 1L summer hiring... if you can swing PI for 1L summer (and I got a great position eventually), I would recommend it if only because you get a sense for what PI law jobs were like (I certainly know that I had a better sense for firm jobs and in-house jobs from friends I'd made before law school) AND to get some PI on your resume in case that's what you want to do later. The low or zero pay sucks, but I think it's worth it in the long run.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: existentialcaptain and 4 guests