DOJ SLIP 2010 Forum

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know why some agencies dont conduct interviews?

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know why some agencies dont conduct interviews?

lazy?

[Anonymous User]

what is the background check like for the SLIP?

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know why some agencies dont conduct interviews?

lazy?

I wonder if it means those departments have more or less candidates under consideration

[Anonymous User]

Does anyone know why some agencies dont conduct interviews?

lazy?

I wonder if it means those departments have more or less candidates under consideration

The problem is, we still don't know which departments actually fall into that category. We know that:

BOP, Antitrust, and Tax definitely conduct interviews.

Immigration maybe doesn't? (I can't remember on them)

And Civil/Civil Rights may or may not. Some people have reported interviews going on in those components in years past, and others have said they've heard of hires w/o them. But since we don't know for sure, it's hard to make an assessment of the reasons for why this might be the case.

I personally find it a bit odd that they wouldn't want to at least talk to someone to make sure they aren't completely crazy but.... who am I to say? It's not like I've ever hired someone for something before.

[Anonymous User]

Immigration does not interview SLIP candidates but does interview Honors candidates, which seems odd. The immigration office only asked for SLIP finalists to submit writing samples, an office pref sheet, and transcript. Therefore, they may have their minds pretty much made up already....or not

ya, who knows

Edit: Also, a friend of mine who got an antitrust spot last year said the interview was pretty much a formality and was convinced that they had their minds 90% made up when they interviewed her (kind of like OCI screeners, I guess)

[Anonymous User]

Immigration does not interview SLIP candidates but does interview Honors candidates, which seems odd. The immigration office only asked for SLIP finalists to submit writing samples, an office pref sheet, and transcript. Therefore, they may have their minds pretty much made up already....or not

ya, who knows

Edit: Also, a friend of mine who got an antitrust spot last year said the interview was pretty much a formality and was convinced that they had their minds 90% made up when they interviewed her (kind of like OCI screeners, I guess)

I'm curious as to why your friend felt that way. Can you ask her to elaborate?

[Anonymous User]

Immigration does not interview SLIP candidates but does interview Honors candidates, which seems odd. The immigration office only asked for SLIP finalists to submit writing samples, an office pref sheet, and transcript. Therefore, they may have their minds pretty much made up already....or not

ya, who knows

Edit: Also, a friend of mine who got an antitrust spot last year said the interview was pretty much a formality and was convinced that they had their minds 90% made up when they interviewed her (kind of like OCI screeners, I guess)

I'm curious as to why your friend felt that way. Can you ask her to elaborate?

I think it was the nature of the questions more than anything. They were most concerned with making sure she was really interested in the specific field rather than getting a feel for her skills/personality. She, along with others, have said the government tries to hire people from their paper records rather than how they feel about them in an interview (not sure why this is, though).

[Anonymous User]

Immigration does not interview SLIP candidates but does interview Honors candidates, which seems odd. The immigration office only asked for SLIP finalists to submit writing samples, an office pref sheet, and transcript. Therefore, they may have their minds pretty much made up already....or not

ya, who knows

Edit: Also, a friend of mine who got an antitrust spot last year said the interview was pretty much a formality and was convinced that they had their minds 90% made up when they interviewed her (kind of like OCI screeners, I guess)

I'm curious as to why your friend felt that way. Can you ask her to elaborate?

I think it was the nature of the questions more than anything. They were most concerned with making sure she was really interested in the specific field rather than getting a feel for her skills/personality. She, along with others, have said the government tries to hire people from their paper records rather than how they feel about them in an interview (not sure why this is, though).

That's... interesting, but still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean, if they want to make sure you're interested in the field, doesn't that mean the interview is important? Or is it really the case that if you have the best paper stats you'll get hired even if you don't really demonstrate a huge interest in the area of work / government?

For example, let's say we have two candidates, and they're both going for antitrust:

Person 1 is top 20% at YHS. Maybe they're on law review too. They've taken antitrust, but in the interview don't articulate an interest in the field beyond enjoying the class. Their resume is also neutral as to firm vs. public interest.

Person 2 is top 1/3 at... I don't know... somewhere else in the T14? T25? They're on a secondary journal. In the interview, they demonstrate serious interest in antitrust and their resume suggests a commitment to public interest / government work.

Let's say both candidates are equally personable (so we're not dealing with, like, someone who blows an interview by being antisocial or completely unprepared)...

Who gets the job?

[Anonymous User]

Immigration does not interview SLIP candidates but does interview Honors candidates, which seems odd. The immigration office only asked for SLIP finalists to submit writing samples, an office pref sheet, and transcript. Therefore, they may have their minds pretty much made up already....or not

ya, who knows

Edit: Also, a friend of mine who got an antitrust spot last year said the interview was pretty much a formality and was convinced that they had their minds 90% made up when they interviewed her (kind of like OCI screeners, I guess)

I'm curious as to why your friend felt that way. Can you ask her to elaborate?

I think it was the nature of the questions more than anything. They were most concerned with making sure she was really interested in the specific field rather than getting a feel for her skills/personality. She, along with others, have said the government tries to hire people from their paper records rather than how they feel about them in an interview (not sure why this is, though).

That's... interesting, but still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean, if they want to make sure you're interested in the field, doesn't that mean the interview is important? Or is it really the case that if you have the best paper stats you'll get hired even if you don't really demonstrate a huge interest in the area of work / government?

For example, let's say we have two candidates, and they're both going for antitrust:

Person 1 is top 20% at YHS. Maybe they're on law review too. They've taken antitrust, but in the interview don't articulate an interest in the field beyond enjoying the class. Their resume is also neutral as to firm vs. public interest.

Person 2 is top 1/3 at... I don't know... somewhere else in the T14? T25? They're on a secondary journal. In the interview, they demonstrate serious interest in antitrust and their resume suggests a commitment to public interest / government work.

Let's say both candidates are equally personable (so we're not dealing with, like, someone who blows an interview by being antisocial or completely unprepared)...

Who gets the job?

I get what you're saying, but maybe she was implying that they asked about her interest just to make sure she really wanted the job and it wasn't just one of a million jobs she applied to and lucked out and got an interview. I have absolutely no idea, though, and the process is as confusing to me as everyone else.

[Anonymous User]

I'm curious as to why your friend felt that way. Can you ask her to elaborate?

I think it was the nature of the questions more than anything. They were most concerned with making sure she was really interested in the specific field rather than getting a feel for her skills/personality. She, along with others, have said the government tries to hire people from their paper records rather than how they feel about them in an interview (not sure why this is, though).

That's... interesting, but still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. I mean, if they want to make sure you're interested in the field, doesn't that mean the interview is important? Or is it really the case that if you have the best paper stats you'll get hired even if you don't really demonstrate a huge interest in the area of work / government?

For example, let's say we have two candidates, and they're both going for antitrust:

Person 1 is top 20% at YHS. Maybe they're on law review too. They've taken antitrust, but in the interview don't articulate an interest in the field beyond enjoying the class. Their resume is also neutral as to firm vs. public interest.

Person 2 is top 1/3 at... I don't know... somewhere else in the T14? T25? They're on a secondary journal. In the interview, they demonstrate serious interest in antitrust and their resume suggests a commitment to public interest / government work.

Let's say both candidates are equally personable (so we're not dealing with, like, someone who blows an interview by being antisocial or completely unprepared)...

Who gets the job?

I get what you're saying, but maybe she was implying that they asked about her interest just to make sure she really wanted the job and it wasn't just one of a million jobs she applied to and lucked out and got an interview. I have absolutely no idea, though, and the process is as confusing to me as everyone else.

Oh I see. Yeah, I think that could be a possibility. The problem with viewing it like the scenario I said above is that we've seen examples earlier in this thread of people who clearly have good paper stats -- that one poster with a V5 offer in their back pocket comes to mind -- but who haven't heard a peep from the DOJ. At the same time, many of the people who have reported hearing from a component seem to be genuinely interested in the organization (at least on here). I don't recall reading any responses in this thread from people committed to firm life who just sort of lucked out with a DOJ call.

[Anonymous User]

Also, for what it's worth, I will say that in my own interview my summer jobs, grades, or other experience never came up. The first two questions of me were why antitrust and how do you feel about criminal law. Perhaps this conforms to your friend's experience?

[Anonymous User]

Offer received and accepted at antitrust (non-DC). For the rest of you waiting, apparently today was the first day that the DOJ was allowed to make offers. The process has started, but speculation is that DC is moving slowly and most offers will occur during November.

[Anonymous User]

From the DOJ website

Re: SLIP interview decisions
"Most of the SLIP notifications are out. However, an informal participant, the Office of Justice Programs (Office of Civil Rights), is still reviewing applications from candidates that originally designated the Civil Rights Division as an employment preference. We anticipate issuing regrets notices next week, but generally speaking, if you did not receive an email indicating that a component had selected you for consideration, you should shift your focus to other employment opportunities."

[Anonymous User]

[quote="Anonymous User"]Offer received and accepted at antitrust (non-DC). For the rest of you waiting, apparently today was the first day that the DOJ was allowed to make offers. The process has started, but speculation is that DC is moving slowly and most offers will occur during November.[/qu

Big Congrats!!! SLIP or Honors? (Also, could everyone make that clear when they post acceptances?)

[Anonymous User]

status just changed to selected as finalist. DOJ antitrust non dc.

[Anonymous User]

How were you notified? Congrats!!!!

[Anonymous User]

Offer received and accepted at antitrust (non-DC). For the rest of you waiting, apparently today was the first day that the DOJ was allowed to make offers. The process has started, but speculation is that DC is moving slowly and most offers will occur during November.

did your status change to finalist first?

[Anonymous User]

I'm the poster who posted about an offer above. In answer to the questions:

1. It was for SLIP
2. I was notified by phone this morning
3. I hadn't checked until after I got the offer, but my status right now is selected as finalist.

[Anonymous User]

Awesome...

Here's hoping more good news keeps rolling into this thread.

[Anonymous User]

I got an offer from DOJ antitrust- DC SLIP last week. Accepted yesterday.

[Anonymous User]

I got an offer from DOJ antitrust- DC SLIP last week. Accepted yesterday.

Well, I guess that would prove incorrect the statement that yesterday (Tuesday) was the first day DoJ could put offers out there...unless the DoJ contacts that the earlier poster spoke with were only speaking on behalf of a particular division.

[Anonymous User]

I got an offer from DOJ antitrust- DC SLIP last week. Accepted yesterday.

did your status change to finalist first?

[Anonymous User]

I got an offer from DOJ antitrust- DC SLIP last week. Accepted yesterday.

Well, I guess that would prove incorrect the statement that yesterday (Tuesday) was the first day DoJ could put offers out there...unless the DoJ contacts that the earlier poster spoke with were only speaking on behalf of a particular division.

It might have been restricted to division or field office. Not sure. But that's what they told me when they gave me my offer, so it's coming from at least a decently reliable source.

Maybe the DC antitrust office just decided to break the rules.

[Anonymous User]

Has anyone who applied through SLIP heard back from Civil Rights yet?