Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

(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.
NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:36 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:40 pm

NYAssociate wrote:The rationale for keeping the information away from message boards is that it presumably makes public what schools each firm has as "favorites," information firms keep very secret. Posting the data, thus, hurts students in the long run since it might discourage certain firms from playing favorites with your school. At the end, the value in helping people bid is outweighed by this factor.



FTR, I'd never argue that such data ought to be leaked to a message board. I see the rationale for keeping it private. I just wish we were in the know, too. I'd be happy to keep it quiet in return.

I can't be unbiased about the issue, though. I am at the point where I can no longer control my stress over the bidlist that is due this week.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:43 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:48 pm

NYAssociate wrote:I think there's enough information out there for you to create an intelligently-made bid list.


That's probably correct. Still, I wouldn't mind knowing which - if any - firms favor my school. I suppose visiting company's website to see which schools are best represented would provide a clue but that seems like an imperfect approximation.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:50 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:54 pm

NYAssociate wrote:
dresden doll wrote:
NYAssociate wrote:I think there's enough information out there for you to create an intelligently-made bid list.


That's probably correct. Still, I wouldn't mind knowing which - if any - firms favor my school. I suppose visiting company's website to see which schools are best represented would provide a clue but that seems like an imperfect approximation.


Probably a good method. Another one is to see a firm's donations to your school, endowed chairs, etc.

I also think that if you're at the best school in your city (like CN in NYC, H in Boston, UChicago in Chicago) you have a better chance with firms in those cities/regions.


I have an inkling, based on what I have seen, that K and E and Sidley Austin are pretty fond of my school. That's just a guess, though.

I do agree that UChi students are at an advantage in Chicago. In fact, I'll be filling out all spots that remain after I've put in bids for NYC offices with Chi firms. The trouble is that I really don't want to remain in Chicago. Knowing which NYC offices/firms favor my school would be of greater help for me.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:56 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 5:58 pm

NYAssociate wrote:
I do agree that UChi students are at an advantage in Chicago. In fact, I'll be filling out all spots that remain after I've put in bids for NYC offices with Chi firms. The trouble is that I really don't want to remain in Chicago. Knowing which NYC offices/firms favor my school would be of greater help for me.


I think Chicago students have an advantage at any NYC firm. Since the school predominantly places in Chicago, and its most successful students tend to focus on NYC, there is very little competition for NYC. NYC firms love UChicago kids, so it tends to be a little easier. That said, I don't think Cleary would dip below their grade cut-offs for a UChicago kid just because only three of them are interviewing.


Yeah, I don't think so either. Sad news for me, because I'd kill to work for Cleary. They're pretty much my dream firm.

NYAssociate
Posts: 713
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 8:15 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby NYAssociate » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:02 pm

.
Last edited by NYAssociate on Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:08 pm

NYAssociate wrote:Cleary has its flaws. It's a great place to work at, start a career at, and do certain things at. But it really depends on what you want to do. For example, I think there are better litigation options in NYC. For M&A, though, I think the place is hard to beat.


I'm mostly infatuated with the firm because I've met associates who work there and who are unanimous in saying that the quality of life at Cleary is much better relative to peer firms. It bears noting that I've met all of them in very informal settings - one is my very close friend's older sister and a great person all around - and that they pretty much had no incentive to bullshit me.

Another person I know that worked for Cleary has also worked for Sherman and Stearling in Germany and is now in London. The Cleary job was her favorite one by far and she's a pretty difficult person. Complaining is her default mode.

Eh. This discussion is mostly academic, to be honest.

User avatar
bwv812
Posts: 548
Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:18 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby bwv812 » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:47 pm

.
Last edited by bwv812 on Fri Nov 26, 2010 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273316
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:53 pm

bwv812 wrote:
dresden doll wrote:FTR, I'd never argue that such data ought to be leaked to a message board. I see the rationale for keeping it private. I just wish we were in the know, too. I'd be happy to keep it quiet in return.

In another thread you said you thought OCI/placement information should be public and that if your school shared the data you would post it here.

I was referring to some of the more basic data, though. As in, the percentage of people hired through OCI, number of unique employers interviewing at each school, and similar. I wouldn't choose to post grade cutoffs for my school. Also, I didn't consider implications of the privacy issue until today, really.

Anyway. Apologies for being imprecise.

User avatar
dresden doll
Posts: 6802
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 1:11 am

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby dresden doll » Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:53 pm

^Mistakenly posted as anonymous. Sorry, mods.

User avatar
como
Posts: 512
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:41 pm

Re: Apparently UK firms are more prestige-obsessed than us

Postby como » Tue Aug 03, 2010 12:27 am

bwv812 wrote:
dresden doll wrote:FTR, I'd never argue that such data ought to be leaked to a message board. I see the rationale for keeping it private. I just wish we were in the know, too. I'd be happy to keep it quiet in return.

In another thread you said you thought OCI/placement information should be public and that if your school shared the data you would post it here.

disco_barred wrote:My office cites a few reasons: Employers don't want students to know with particularity, because they fear it would make for an arms race. There are privacy issues, since if a firm is only doing a small number of interviews or callbacks it could out identities fairly easily. They don't want info to get public. They also feel any particular slice of data could be misleading, which certainly comes across as parental but what can you do.


Georgetown cites privacy as being why the only release hiring medians if more than 5 people have been hired since 1998. Up until last year, they also released the number of people hired since 1998 (if at least 5 had been hired). They could do something similar with offer rates, etc.

I've also heard the excuse that breaking down the numbers in different ways could lead to misleading impressions, but for the most part the obvious answer would be to collect more data that could correct these impressions; and even if they don't release the underlying data, they could release annual trend reports like the NLJ or NALP release, broadly summarizing trends in a way they feel isn't misleading.

The only answer justification that would be somewhat compelling would be if firms are really, really against such leakage (but they can't be too upset, given the number of schools that do release such data). Even if firms do resist the dissemination of such information, the primary consumers of law school services are students, not firms (and it is most definitely the students who are the ones footing the bill), and the data should only be withheld if they schools really think employment would be hurt if the data is released. As it is, it seems almost criminal that schools can take so much money while providing consumers with so little information in return.


I agree. I haven't leaked any of my school's data and I will not so long as it is marked "confidential," but I don't think that the kind of data the school has should be withheld from potential law students. Additionally, I have gotten access to data given to past classes that is much more informative than the aggregated stuff they have given my class. I'm not quite sure why firms even care about GPA and/or callback information.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.