Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby miamiman » Fri May 14, 2010 11:38 am

I'm kind of torn in how I want to react to this. Obviously, it's a rankings play. And I don't imagine too many employers really need a $3,500 stipend to justify a hiring decision. Alternatively, maybe one more SMU law grad finds decent near-term employment? Your thoughts..





http://abovethelaw.com/2010/05/smu-will ... graduates/

User avatar
TheBigMediocre
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:53 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby TheBigMediocre » Fri May 14, 2010 11:45 am

Sounds like some firms are going to get a free month of doc review...!

Image

User avatar
stintez
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 12:55 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby stintez » Fri May 14, 2010 11:45 am

I think it's a sad sad day for all.

eldizknee
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 6:33 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby eldizknee » Fri May 14, 2010 11:47 am

.
Last edited by eldizknee on Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby d34d9823 » Fri May 14, 2010 11:51 am

Seems like a win-win for everybody if it works. What's the problem?

2009 Prospective
Posts: 236
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:32 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby 2009 Prospective » Fri May 14, 2010 11:52 am

I seem to recall a thread several months back where the OP suggested this very idea.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby miamiman » Fri May 14, 2010 11:53 am

2009 Prospective wrote:I seem to recall a thread several months back where the OP suggested this very idea.


which thread?

eldizknee
Posts: 162
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 6:33 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby eldizknee » Fri May 14, 2010 11:54 am

.
Last edited by eldizknee on Sat Jan 29, 2011 2:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
pugalicious
Posts: 190
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 10:52 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby pugalicious » Fri May 14, 2010 11:56 am

eldizknee wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:Seems like a win-win for everybody if it works. What's the problem?


I like how SMU wants to keep it’s employment numbers up — but with no strings attached. This letter is essentially saying “hire our kids so we can report strong employment numbers, we don’t really care what happens to them after that.”


This is the problem. It serves the school, not the students. Instead of gaming the rankings by paying unemployed grads to work for the school for a few months, they'll be paying other people to hire their unemployed students for a few months. Same game, different strategy.


Isn't it a slightly better strategy because the student at least gets more valuable experience by working outside the law school?

acdisagod
Posts: 431
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 12:46 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby acdisagod » Fri May 14, 2010 11:57 am

This is rankings gaming at its worst

User avatar
TheBigMediocre
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:53 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby TheBigMediocre » Fri May 14, 2010 11:58 am

acdisagod wrote:This is rankings gaming at its worst


False. http://www.cooley.edu/rankings/

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby d34d9823 » Fri May 14, 2010 11:59 am

eldizknee wrote:
d34dluk3 wrote:Seems like a win-win for everybody if it works. What's the problem?


I like how SMU wants to keep it’s employment numbers up — but with no strings attached. This letter is essentially saying “hire our kids so we can report strong employment numbers, we don’t really care what happens to them after that.”


This is the problem. It serves the school, not the students. Instead of gaming the rankings by paying unemployed grads to work for the school for a few months, they'll be paying other people to hire their unemployed students for a few months. Same game, different strategy.

Yeah but it gives them an in at that firm. Also, I think people in general are responsible for looking out for their own interests. The school certainly doesn't coerce them to take the position.

User avatar
doyleoil
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby doyleoil » Fri May 14, 2010 11:59 am

TheBigMediocre wrote:
acdisagod wrote:This is rankings gaming at its worst


False. http://www.cooley.edu/rankings/


i don't think you know what "gaming" means

User avatar
TheBigMediocre
Posts: 640
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:53 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby TheBigMediocre » Fri May 14, 2010 12:10 pm

doyleoil wrote:
TheBigMediocre wrote:
acdisagod wrote:This is rankings gaming at its worst


False. http://www.cooley.edu/rankings/


i don't think you know what "gaming" means


I do. It was a lighthearted reply to a hyperbole.

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby ggocat » Fri May 14, 2010 12:20 pm

They're just trying to keep up with top schools who have been doing this for years under the guise of public interest fellowships.

Georgetown established a program to fund more than sixty fellowships for the class of 2010 at $4,000 per graduate. The University of Michigan established a program to fund graduates for three months at $4,000 per graduate. The University of Texas recently had thirty-eight graduates participate in post-graduate fellowships funded at $6,000 each. The University of Miami created eight fellowships lasting twenty-seven weeks and funded at $10,000 each. Columbia created five fellowships funded at $25,000 for eight months. Boston College also funds some post-graduate fellowships, but the details have not been reported (in addition to hiring students as research assistants and library workers).

I disagree, however, to the naysayers who think this only benefits SMU. It benefits the students as well because many law firms will likely decide to hire these graduates. With UT's public interest program, about half of the participants in one recent year became full-time employees.

Sources:
BCLS Rolls Out Plans to Help Graduating Students, EAGLEIONLINE, Apr. 28, 2009, --LinkRemoved-- (reporting that the law school will employ graduates in the law library and that “graduates are being welcomed to apply for [research] assistantships with professors”).

Posting of ChiSoxinDC to http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 6#p2592062 (Feb. 19, 2010, 11:37 EST); Posting of ,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,,. .,.,.,.,,...,. ,, to http://xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id ... 9af6312f03 (Feb. 3, 2010, 19:23 EST).

Posting of Elie Mystal to Above the Law, --LinkRemoved-- (June 5, 2009, 13:34 EST).

Kriston Fortune, The Joe R. and Teresa L. Long Career Launch Program, http://www.utexas.edu/law/depts/alumni/ ... rogram.php.

Posting of Elie Mystal to Above the Law, --LinkRemoved-- (Oct. 26, 2009, 14:26 EST).

Posting of Elie Mystal to Above the Law, --LinkRemoved-- (May 26, 2009, 15:00 EST).

Emily Watkins, Tough Market for Law School Grads, ABC NEWS, Nov. 26, 2009, available at http://abcnews.go.com/Business/tough-ma ... 629&page=4.

User avatar
underdawg
Posts: 1131
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 1:15 am

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby underdawg » Fri May 14, 2010 1:02 pm

but aren't public interest fellowships for...public interest? in your links, i think they are paying the students to entice them to do PI instead of firm work. i don't think anyone has a real problem with that, except perhaps the PI kids with family money that probably get all indignant about it (they're indignant about everything).

that said, good effort by SMU i suppose, except they put a lot of emphasis on "no strings attached," which sucks for the student. time will tell i suppose...they are doing it for the wrong reasons (obvious ranking ploy) but it could actually help some students, as long as firms don't treat it as a month-long rental

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby Aqualibrium » Fri May 14, 2010 1:33 pm

I wouldn't call this rankings gaming; SMU could easily just keep their money in their pockets and fudge employment/salary numbers like lots of other schools do.

This is a good thing. Those students get the chance to impress someone, and maybe get a job. If 5 students get a post graduate job out of this program it will be a success.

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby d34d9823 » Fri May 14, 2010 2:24 pm

underdawg wrote:but aren't public interest fellowships for...public interest? in your links, i think they are paying the students to entice them to do PI instead of firm work. i don't think anyone has a real problem with that, except perhaps the PI kids with family money that probably get all indignant about it (they're indignant about everything).

that said, good effort by SMU i suppose, except they put a lot of emphasis on "no strings attached," which sucks for the student. time will tell i suppose...they are doing it for the wrong reasons (obvious ranking ploy) but it could actually help some students, as long as firms don't treat it as a month-long rental

I'm skeptical that $4K could induce someone who has a real job offer to do a "public interest fellowship."

User avatar
doyleoil
Posts: 631
Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:59 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby doyleoil » Sat May 15, 2010 3:19 pm

betasteve wrote:It is likely that firms would hire the grads after the bar exam


i understand and appreciate the rest of your argument, but i think this assumption can only be accurate if the firms targeted by this offer are firms that normally hire only after the bar - otherwise, why do they start caring about the bar in the face of this offer? it's not like the offer is gonna suddenly induce a firm to "test out" the bottom 10% of the class if they'd never touch those types before

Anonymous User
Posts: 273601
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby Anonymous User » Mon May 17, 2010 5:30 pm

They have a similar program for 2L's offering to match a summer salary up to a certain amount (although the 2L get this as a tuition credit, not cash)

I'm at SMU and I'm thankful for both of these programs. I know two 3L's taking advantage of the test drive program and they don't give a crap whether the program games the system; they're just happy to have some employment (even though it may not be long-term). Salary for one or two months > being broke while you search for a permanent job.

Seriously, for almost everyone below the top 15% (who doesn't land a gig through OCI), this is pretty much the first time career services has made a relevant, positive impact.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby miamiman » Mon May 17, 2010 8:03 pm

Anonymous User wrote:They have a similar program for 2L's offering to match a summer salary up to a certain amount (although the 2L get this as a tuition credit, not cash)

I'm at SMU and I'm thankful for both of these programs. I know two 3L's taking advantage of the test drive program and they don't give a crap whether the program games the system; they're just happy to have some employment (even though it may not be long-term). Salary for one or two months > being broke while you search for a permanent job.

Seriously, for almost everyone below the top 15% (who doesn't land a gig through OCI), this is pretty much the first time career services has made a relevant, positive impact.



Really, salary for 1 mo at a firm that has no intention of retaining you and subsequently lets you go is better than no salary/prolonged job search? After they chew you up and spit you out, you're back on your ass, searching desperately for firm work and then forced to explain why you were working for/fired from a different firm after one month....

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby Aqualibrium » Mon May 17, 2010 8:12 pm

miamiman wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:They have a similar program for 2L's offering to match a summer salary up to a certain amount (although the 2L get this as a tuition credit, not cash)

I'm at SMU and I'm thankful for both of these programs. I know two 3L's taking advantage of the test drive program and they don't give a crap whether the program games the system; they're just happy to have some employment (even though it may not be long-term). Salary for one or two months > being broke while you search for a permanent job.

Seriously, for almost everyone below the top 15% (who doesn't land a gig through OCI), this is pretty much the first time career services has made a relevant, positive impact.



Really, salary for 1 mo at a firm that has no intention of retaining you and subsequently lets you go is better than no salary/prolonged job search? After they chew you up and spit you out, you're back on your ass, searching desperately for firm work and then forced to explain why you were working for/fired from a different firm after one month....



I won't pretend that I have a huge wealth of knowledge regarding this topic, but you haven't even spent a week in a law school classroom yet. From my own experiences during the 1L job hunt, and from talking to 2L's and 3L's I can guarantee you that they'd rather work for a month or two than be out in the cold. Getting in the door, which usually means getting an interview, is hard enough. Furthermore, legal interviews (at least in my experience) are usually bs. The opportunity to actually SHOW an employer what you can do, network, job hunt, and get paid at the same time is really amazing. SMU is doing a good thing here.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby miamiman » Mon May 17, 2010 8:14 pm

The fact that you've sat in a law school classroom makes you any more of an authority on this?

Aqualibrium
Posts: 2011
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:57 am

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby Aqualibrium » Mon May 17, 2010 8:17 pm

miamiman wrote:The fact that you've sat in a law school classroom makes you any more of an authority on this?


I explicitly said that I was no authority on this topic. I then proceeded to cite my own personal experience and that of others with regards to this topic.

miamiman
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:55 pm

Re: Good/Bad: SMU Paying Employers to Take their Kids

Postby miamiman » Mon May 17, 2010 8:20 pm

I genuinely dont think 1 mos at a firm/ having to explain that employment history is better than 0 mos at a firm. Are you currently at SMU?




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.