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.
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 8:29 pm

miamiman wrote: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?



It's really not about having to explain the employment history to subsequent potential employers. It's about first off getting a chance, and secondly being able to be evaluated based on your skills and your fit at the firm. Best case scenario they take SMU's offer to keep you on for an additional month, then they offer you a job. Worst case scenario, you meet some people who are connected, who can speak for your work product, and you move along in your job search. As long as you understand getting into a firm through this program does not mean that your job search ends, this is a win win.

Like I said before, legal interviews, on top of being hard to get, are mostly bs. You're given an offer/callback or not at the whim of the interviewer (I had two interviews that were all about college basketball; at one I got a job offer 2 days later no callback, at the other I got a rejection letter 1 month later). They very rarely ask you probing questions about your resume, why you would like to be with that specific firm, etc... This program gives you a better chance to be evaluated on your merits imo. All the firm has to lose is a little bit of office space.


I'm not at SMU.....

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

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

Postby thesealocust » Mon May 17, 2010 10:45 pm

oops
Last edited by thesealocust on Wed Jun 30, 2010 8:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273135
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 11:29 pm

The way how the economy is today I would take it, foreclosures are at its highest there is not enough of anything to go around including jobs. Working for one month getting connections and having a little extra something to put on your resume is definately better than sitting at home worrying how next month bills gonna get paid and if someone is going to call you from the 100 job applications you send out today. You basically have nothing to lose and you can either gain permanent employment or a months pay and a little experience.

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

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

Postby Aqualibrium » Tue May 18, 2010 12:12 am

Anonymous User wrote:The way how the economy is today I would take it, foreclosures are at its highest there is not enough of anything to go around including jobs. Working for one month getting connections and having a little extra something to put on your resume is definately better than sitting at home worrying how next month bills gonna get paid and if someone is going to call you from the 100 job applications you send out today. You basically have nothing to lose and you can either gain permanent employment or a months pay and a little experience.


anonymous why?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273135
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

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

Postby Anonymous User » Tue May 18, 2010 10:37 am

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....



Yes, really. Salary for 1 month while you continue to search for a permanent gig > Being broke while you search for a permanent gig.

Chew you up an spit you out? How about appreciate your work and help you network even if they don't hire you? Cynical much?

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

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

Postby miamiman » Tue May 18, 2010 10:42 am

Anonymous User wrote:
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....



Yes, really. Salary for 1 month while you continue to search for a permanent gig > Being broke while you search for a permanent gig.

Chew you up an spit you out? How about appreciate your work and help you network even if they don't hire you? Cynical much?


To think that any employer that hires you for 1 month with no expectation of retaining you after that month is cynical?

User avatar
Always Credited
Posts: 2509
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 1:31 pm

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

Postby Always Credited » Tue May 18, 2010 10:49 am

I doubt the employers would hire without ANY expectation WHATSOEVER of EVER retaining the new hire. Its probably more of a 50/50 shot, a free bet if you will, on SMU's coin. If the student busts his ass and proves competent, than the firm just picked up a great new hire without any risk whatsoever, and saved a months salary on top.

If the person is unsociable, just doesn't fit in, creepy, and a terrible worker...then the firm of course cuts him at, again, no cost to themselves.

JOThompson
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:16 am

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

Postby JOThompson » Tue May 18, 2010 10:55 am

Anonymous User wrote:
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....



Yes, really. Salary for 1 month while you continue to search for a permanent gig > Being broke while you search for a permanent gig.

Chew you up an spit you out? How about appreciate your work and help you network even if they don't hire you? Cynical much?

+1

Not ideal, but a heck of a lot better than *nothing*

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

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

Postby acdisagod » Tue May 18, 2010 11:13 am

It doesn't seem to make sense upon further review. There would be no point probably in hiring a lawyer for a month and then dropping them. In guerilla tactics for getting the legal job of your dream, the authors wrote that firms don't turn a profit on their new lawyers until their third year.
If that is true, then employers weren't going to higher these individuals for just one month and SMU is wasting their money. I've talked to a couple of lawyers and they said hiring a lawyer for one month doesn't seem to make any sense for the firm...

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

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

Postby d34d9823 » Tue May 18, 2010 11:18 am

acdisagod wrote:It doesn't seem to make sense upon further review. There would be no point probably in hiring a lawyer for a month and then dropping them. In guerilla tactics for getting the legal job of your dream, the authors wrote that firms don't turn a profit on their new lawyers until their third year.
If that is true, then employers weren't going to higher these individuals for just one month and SMU is wasting their money. I've talked to a couple of lawyers and they said hiring a lawyer for one month doesn't seem to make any sense for the firm...

There's a major benefit for the firm here you're missing. In the business world, people often turn out differently than companies expect based on the interview. My company has a few people who are like this currently. This program allows firms to trial someone without the expectation of keeping them or the bad press that goes along with no-offering/laying-off associates. I imagine the firm expects to get 1 or 2 quality people for every 10 or so trials. They'll keep them, and let the rest go.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.