Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Dec 07, 2010 1:40 pm

Wow. This is pretty incredible.

I'm glad I decided to stay at my lower T14 instead of take that transfer acceptance to H.

I wonder how much the lack of grades + huge class size played into this? Seems like a bad combination.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby vanwinkle » Tue Dec 07, 2010 1:51 pm

2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Autoadmit isn't exactly a reputable source for information. Where are they getting their numbers from? Without knowing they're getting reliable info, I don't know that those numbers mean anything. But I still believe those numbers are possible, if only because they represent an incomplete data set anyway.

Some who struck out at EIP got firm jobs through mass mailings, especially those who targeted their home (secondary) markets. EIP focuses on the major markets almost exclusively, and you can't use EIP alone as a measure of how many got firm jobs. The pay at these firms is lower, but in many cases near market to start, and COL is usually lower to compensate. Without being able to add in students that took this route, the data is incomplete regarding how many received and accepted offers at law firms.

Also, "did not accept EIP offer ≠ did not receive EIP offer". It's possible that at least some of those people are individuals who did not strike out but, for one reason or another, declined the offer(s) they did receive, and accepted work elsewhere. This could be to take an offer received outside of EIP, or to pursue public service internships instead after doing callbacks and deciding they did not like large law firms.

2LLLL wrote:Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.

It says that 1/3 did not accept a job offered through EIP. It doesn't mention those who got firm offers through non-EIP resources, or who wilfully declined EIP offers to pursue non-EIP offers such as public service positions. Saying "no EIP acceptance = no firm offers" isn't entirely correct. I will stand by the assertion that there are some here who struck out here and are still looking, and that people do need to be aware of that possibility, but let's not distort things to an extreme.

Also, and this is somewhat unique to HLS, but BigLaw is not the "only financially viable option" here. Harvard's LIPP is the most generous loan repayment program out there and will cover all student loans, whether federal or private, for legal work in any field, even corporate work. If you end up in low-paying work, HLS will still help you out by paying your loans off for you. And unlike IBR, which just lowers the amount you pay but makes you retain the balance, HLS is actually paying those loan amounts off with its contribution, meaning your loan amount decreases over time and at the end of your loan term they're gone with no balance to forgive.

Essentially, the lower your income, the less your education ends up costing you here. That makes almost any income bracket a "financially viable" outcome. People just need to have realistic expectations. They shouldn't come in here thinking cash, cars, caviar, but unless they were already leaving behind high-paying work to come here, they're probably going to still come out ahead.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby DoubleChecks » Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:00 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Autoadmit isn't exactly a reputable source for information. Where are they getting their numbers from? Without knowing they're getting reliable info, I don't know that those numbers mean anything. But I still believe those numbers are possible, if only because they represent an incomplete data set anyway.

Some who struck out at EIP got firm jobs through mass mailings, especially those who targeted their home (secondary) markets. EIP focuses on the major markets almost exclusively, and you can't use EIP alone as a measure of how many got firm jobs. The pay at these firms is lower, but in many cases near market to start, and COL is usually lower to compensate. Without being able to add in students that took this route, the data is incomplete regarding how many received and accepted offers at law firms.

Also, "did not accept EIP offer ≠ did not receive EIP offer". It's possible that at least some of those people are individuals who did not strike out but, for one reason or another, declined the offer(s) they did receive, and accepted work elsewhere. This could be to take an offer received outside of EIP, or to pursue public service internships instead after doing callbacks and deciding they did not like large law firms.

2LLLL wrote:Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.

It says that 1/3 did not accept a job offered through EIP. It doesn't mention those who got firm offers through non-EIP resources, or who wilfully declined EIP offers to pursue non-EIP offers such as public service positions. Saying "no EIP acceptance = no firm offers" isn't entirely correct. I will stand by the assertion that there are some here who struck out here and are still looking, and that people do need to be aware of that possibility, but let's not distort things to an extreme.

Also, and this is somewhat unique to HLS, but BigLaw is not the "only financially viable option" here. Harvard's LIPP is the most generous loan repayment program out there and will cover all student loans, whether federal or private, for legal work in any field, even corporate work. If you end up in low-paying work, HLS will still help you out by paying your loans off for you. And unlike IBR, which just lowers the amount you pay but makes you retain the balance, HLS is actually paying those loan amounts off with its contribution, meaning your loan amount decreases over time and at the end of your loan term they're gone with no balance to forgive.

Essentially, the lower your income, the less your education ends up costing you here. That makes almost any income bracket a "financially viable" outcome. People just need to have realistic expectations. They shouldn't come in here thinking cash, cars, caviar, but unless they were already leaving behind high-paying work to come here, they're probably going to still come out ahead.


good summary, but also a good chance it'll be glossed over by the AutoAdmit posters who will just ignore it lol

i think the point is, the data we have here is so ambiguous that it doesnt tell us nearly enough to draw any solid conclusion -- possible it is as low as 66%, but also possible that it is much higher

id still love to see some hard data that tells me # of 2L @ OCI/# of 2L who received offers at OCI <- though this is still not a complete picture, at least it is a much more accurate ballpark figure

concurrent fork
Posts: 669
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:40 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby concurrent fork » Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:08 pm

+1000 to vanwinkle's comments. Also:

(1) What everyone is referencing is 2009 data. It has been available for quite some time. Results were likely better this year.
(2) The denominator includes 3Ls.
(3) There are other programs through which 2Ls got jobs this year, such as FIP.
(4) Some of the other numbers from this thread/autoadmit seem to be made up.

Nothing earthshattering happened at HLS. Still, moving up EIP helps future 2Ls to be more competitive, and was the right thing to do given the state of the market.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby vanwinkle » Tue Dec 07, 2010 2:09 pm

I'll also add that two repeated complaints I heard were "career services told me I'd be fine targeting DC/CA/something unrealistic given my grades and background" and "career services didn't tell me I should be mass mailing, and I haven't started yet because I waited for all my EIP rejections". I'm willing to bet that next year these people will be 3Ls loudly telling next year's 2Ls what to do better (bid more conservatively/mass-mail sooner if your grades are low, etc). Between increased knowledge there and an earlier EIP to get things rolling, I suspect next year's class could do better than this year's.

User avatar
thecilent
Posts: 2506
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2009 4:55 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby thecilent » Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:27 pm

CLS FTW!

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby A&O » Tue Dec 07, 2010 9:57 pm

I'm willing to bet that next year these people will be 3Ls loudly telling next year's 2Ls what to do better (bid more conservatively/mass-mail sooner if your grades are low, etc). Between increased knowledge there and an earlier EIP to get things rolling, I suspect next year's class could do better than this year's.


Interesting, but unlikely. If this is to be true, then this year's 3Ls would have to have similarly advised this years 2Ls about "what to do better." I say this because the situation between the class of 2011 and the class of 2012 will be highly analogous to the situation between the class of 2012 and the class of 2013. From your post, it seems that either this year's 3Ls either failed to advise, or failed to advise enough.

In terms of "bidding conservatively," I'm not sure whether this is truly beneficial. I interviewed in 2009. From my perspective, the satellite office in NYC of some V100 was just as selective as Debevoise simply because the former intended to have a class of 10 rather than a class of 70. If one truly has terrible grades, the mass mailing should be a default move in addition to "bidding conservatively." If one is at median or above, a combination of interviewing at the top firms with huge summer classes (or simply firms with huge summer classes; they don't have to be elite) and interviewing with less prestigious firms might be more beneficial. From both my year and the class of 2012, I know a lot of students between top 1/3rd and slightly below median who scored some great gigs.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273145
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:03 pm

2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.



I mean, that could be right (not sure where the information is coming from) since I don't know the number of transfers, but assuming there are about 30-35 transfers as I've previously been told, then the number would have to be wrong because 590 is about the total number of 2Ls, including transfers. Again, I'm not 100% sure about the numbers, but knowing the number in the original class pre-transfers makes me skeptical of the number thrown out for those who participated in EIP.

And also, as someone else mentioned, this was not for this past August's EIP, but for last year's (Class of 2011) -- you know, the crappiest hiring year in a very long time.

vanwinkle wrote:I'll also add that two repeated complaints I heard were "career services told me I'd be fine targeting DC/CA/something unrealistic given my grades and background" and "career services didn't tell me I should be mass mailing, and I haven't started yet because I waited for all my EIP rejections". I'm willing to bet that next year these people will be 3Ls loudly telling next year's 2Ls what to do better (bid more conservatively/mass-mail sooner if your grades are low, etc). Between increased knowledge there and an earlier EIP to get things rolling, I suspect next year's class could do better than this year's.


I've heard that complaint and to me, it doesn't fly. I had decent grades + URM and was never told by OCS that I would be fine targeting DC or CA (two markets where I applied). If anything, I found that OCS was a little too cautious given my background and grades. Even though I had a pretty limited EIP compared to others, I still put way too many safety firms on my list and ended up having to substantially trim post-EIP. On top of that, people who say that OCS didn't tell them enough were people who generally didn't do anything that OCS recommended over the summer: reading the newsletter/doing the suggested items in it, doing a recruiter informational call, etc. Even accepting that people were truly unaware that DC was competitive, when we were told at the EIP Orientation the Friday before, people could have added additional firm interviews the morning of the firm's interview day. I'm not really sure what else OCS could have done, aside from holding people's hands and picking their bid list for them (which, btw, I got a ton of feedback on from OCS prior to submitting as well).

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby BruceWayne » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:11 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Autoadmit isn't exactly a reputable source for information. Where are they getting their numbers from? Without knowing they're getting reliable info, I don't know that those numbers mean anything. But I still believe those numbers are possible, if only because they represent an incomplete data set anyway.

Some who struck out at EIP got firm jobs through mass mailings, especially those who targeted their home (secondary) markets. EIP focuses on the major markets almost exclusively, and you can't use EIP alone as a measure of how many got firm jobs. The pay at these firms is lower, but in many cases near market to start, and COL is usually lower to compensate. Without being able to add in students that took this route, the data is incomplete regarding how many received and accepted offers at law firms.

Also, "did not accept EIP offer ≠ did not receive EIP offer". It's possible that at least some of those people are individuals who did not strike out but, for one reason or another, declined the offer(s) they did receive, and accepted work elsewhere. This could be to take an offer received outside of EIP, or to pursue public service internships instead after doing callbacks and deciding they did not like large law firms.

2LLLL wrote:Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.

It says that 1/3 did not accept a job offered through EIP. It doesn't mention those who got firm offers through non-EIP resources, or who wilfully declined EIP offers to pursue non-EIP offers such as public service positions. Saying "no EIP acceptance = no firm offers" isn't entirely correct. I will stand by the assertion that there are some here who struck out here and are still looking, and that people do need to be aware of that possibility, but let's not distort things to an extreme.

Also, and this is somewhat unique to HLS, but BigLaw is not the "only financially viable option" here. Harvard's LIPP is the most generous loan repayment program out there and will cover all student loans, whether federal or private, for legal work in any field, even corporate work. If you end up in low-paying work, HLS will still help you out by paying your loans off for you. And unlike IBR, which just lowers the amount you pay but makes you retain the balance, HLS is actually paying those loan amounts off with its contribution, meaning your loan amount decreases over time and at the end of your loan term they're gone with no balance to forgive.

Essentially, the lower your income, the less your education ends up costing you here. That makes almost any income bracket a "financially viable" outcome. People just need to have realistic expectations. They shouldn't come in here thinking cash, cars, caviar, but unless they were already leaving behind high-paying work to come here, they're probably going to still come out ahead.


Post of the year along with the curmuedugeon one. One thing about Harvard's LIPP that may arguably make it less generous than Stanford's is that it won't cover the loans you took out as a 1L at UVA correct? I thought that LIPP only covered undergrad loans up to 35K/combined 35K with another Harvard graduate degree and obviously any loans taken out at Harvard Law?

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby vanwinkle » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:18 pm

BruceWayne wrote:Post of the year along with the curmuedugeon one. One thing about Harvard's LIPP that may arguably make it less generous than Stanford's is that it won't cover the loans you took out as a 1L at UVA correct? I thought that LIPP only covered undergrad loans up to 35K/combined 35K with another Harvard graduate degree and obviously any loans taken out at Harvard Law?

I've asked more than once and was told they'd cover my 1L loans. Law school loans are law school loans, they said. Should be covered up to whatever the full amount eligible to any 1L.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby DoubleChecks » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:46 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.



I mean, that could be right (not sure where the information is coming from) since I don't know the number of transfers, but assuming there are about 30-35 transfers as I've previously been told, then the number would have to be wrong because 590 is about the total number of 2Ls, including transfers. Again, I'm not 100% sure about the numbers, but knowing the number in the original class pre-transfers makes me skeptical of the number thrown out for those who participated in EIP.

And also, as someone else mentioned, this was not for this past August's EIP, but for last year's (Class of 2011) -- you know, the crappiest hiring year in a very long time.


transfers were like ~40 i think, and if starting class size is ~550, then 590 is THE MAX number of 2Ls that could have been at OCI, i.e. too high a number. i am willing to go on a limb here and say not 100% of the 2L class participated in OCI lol.

if you just shave off 10%, you'd get like ~540 students who would have gone to OCI. on the spreadsheet, total acceptances were 391; 391/540 = 72%, which still doesnt take into account the people who got offered but chose not to do biglaw. all in all, i dont see how it is that insanely different than the ~80% i used to hear lol.

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby BruceWayne » Tue Dec 07, 2010 10:48 pm

vanwinkle wrote:
BruceWayne wrote:Post of the year along with the curmuedugeon one. One thing about Harvard's LIPP that may arguably make it less generous than Stanford's is that it won't cover the loans you took out as a 1L at UVA correct? I thought that LIPP only covered undergrad loans up to 35K/combined 35K with another Harvard graduate degree and obviously any loans taken out at Harvard Law?

I've asked more than once and was told they'd cover my 1L loans. Law school loans are law school loans, they said. Should be covered up to whatever the full amount eligible to any 1L.



Heh heh, I wonder if that's discretionary depending on how much they like the person requesting it....did you ask them this before you decided to attend?

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby Kohinoor » Tue Dec 07, 2010 11:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Wow. This is pretty incredible.

I'm glad I decided to stay at my lower T14 instead of take that transfer acceptance to H.

I wonder how much the lack of grades + huge class size played into this? Seems like a bad combination.

I'm guessing that people with the credentials to transfer into Harvard weren't the ones getting wrecked at EIP for the most part.

conn09
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2008 11:19 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby conn09 » Wed Dec 08, 2010 12:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:
2LLLL wrote:Per AutoAdmit, about 590 HLS 2Ls (including transfers) participated in EIP, and either 377 or 391 (the difference is immaterial) accepted offers. Plugging that into a calculator, that comes out to 66%. I highly doubt that enough students received offers but chose not to accept any of them to materially swing the statistics.

Look at what this statistic says about going to law school - even at the #2 school in the country, you have a 1/3 chance of not getting BigLaw, which for a large amount of students is the only financially viable option coming out of law school.



I mean, that could be right (not sure where the information is coming from) since I don't know the number of transfers, but assuming there are about 30-35 transfers as I've previously been told, then the number would have to be wrong because 590 is about the total number of 2Ls, including transfers. Again, I'm not 100% sure about the numbers, but knowing the number in the original class pre-transfers makes me skeptical of the number thrown out for those who participated in EIP.

And also, as someone else mentioned, this was not for this past August's EIP, but for last year's (Class of 2011) -- you know, the crappiest hiring year in a very long time.

vanwinkle wrote:I'll also add that two repeated complaints I heard were "career services told me I'd be fine targeting DC/CA/something unrealistic given my grades and background" and "career services didn't tell me I should be mass mailing, and I haven't started yet because I waited for all my EIP rejections". I'm willing to bet that next year these people will be 3Ls loudly telling next year's 2Ls what to do better (bid more conservatively/mass-mail sooner if your grades are low, etc). Between increased knowledge there and an earlier EIP to get things rolling, I suspect next year's class could do better than this year's.


I've heard that complaint and to me, it doesn't fly. I had decent grades + URM and was never told by OCS that I would be fine targeting DC or CA (two markets where I applied). If anything, I found that OCS was a little too cautious given my background and grades. Even though I had a pretty limited EIP compared to others, I still put way too many safety firms on my list and ended up having to substantially trim post-EIP. On top of that, people who say that OCS didn't tell them enough were people who generally didn't do anything that OCS recommended over the summer: reading the newsletter/doing the suggested items in it, doing a recruiter informational call, etc. Even accepting that people were truly unaware that DC was competitive, when we were told at the EIP Orientation the Friday before, people could have added additional firm interviews the morning of the firm's interview day. I'm not really sure what else OCS could have done, aside from holding people's hands and picking their bid list for them (which, btw, I got a ton of feedback on from OCS prior to submitting as well).


A lot of the problem with OCS was that they gave horrible advice after people were striking out. When I thought I was in fear of striking out they told me to wait until October to start sending out Mass Mailings.

User avatar
Nom Sawyer
Posts: 933
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 1:28 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby Nom Sawyer » Wed Dec 08, 2010 1:18 pm

Hmm I was just wondering, as an additional point to Vanwinkles, EIP only includes law firms right?

I was talking to a couple friends and a few did say they were deciding between a firm or a consulting company (and I know one ended up choosing a consulting company instead)... This would mean he'd show up as outside the 391 unless EIP includes consulting firms (anybody know if it does or not?).

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Dec 08, 2010 2:08 pm

Nom Sawyer wrote:Hmm I was just wondering, as an additional point to Vanwinkles, EIP only includes law firms right?

I was talking to a couple friends and a few did say they were deciding between a firm or a consulting company (and I know one ended up choosing a consulting company instead)... This would mean he'd show up as outside the 391 unless EIP includes consulting firms (anybody know if it does or not?).

EIP this year included three consulting firms and maybe a dozen or do PI/gov't agencies. Those who attend agree to follow NALP offer/timeline rules (though they may not do callbacks, and many didn't). I imagine they're included in the EIP acceptance totals.

It's worth noting that those who did PI-focused searches may have participated in EIP, not gotten a PI offer there, but ultimately found one elsewhere. The agencies that attended were the nation's most prestigious and competitive; one rejection letter I got said they did over 400 interviews at various OCIs to fill only 10 spots. Especially for people who did EIP to get PI, it was hard, but mainly because the easier-to-get PI stuff is all mass-mailing based.

User avatar
wiseowl
Posts: 1071
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby wiseowl » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:16 pm

A&O wrote:
I'm willing to bet that next year these people will be 3Ls loudly telling next year's 2Ls what to do better (bid more conservatively/mass-mail sooner if your grades are low, etc). Between increased knowledge there and an earlier EIP to get things rolling, I suspect next year's class could do better than this year's.


Interesting, but unlikely. If this is to be true, then this year's 3Ls would have to have similarly advised this years 2Ls about "what to do better." I say this because the situation between the class of 2011 and the class of 2012 will be highly analogous to the situation between the class of 2012 and the class of 2013. From your post, it seems that either this year's 3Ls either failed to advise, or failed to advise enough.
In terms of "bidding conservatively," I'm not sure whether this is truly beneficial. I interviewed in 2009. From my perspective, the satellite office in NYC of some V100 was just as selective as Debevoise simply because the former intended to have a class of 10 rather than a class of 70. If one truly has terrible grades, the mass mailing should be a default move in addition to "bidding conservatively." If one is at median or above, a combination of interviewing at the top firms with huge summer classes (or simply firms with huge summer classes; they don't have to be elite) and interviewing with less prestigious firms might be more beneficial. From both my year and the class of 2012, I know a lot of students between top 1/3rd and slightly below median who scored some great gigs.


this year's 3Ls might not have been the most forthcoming with advice because a lot of them were in direct competition with 2Ls for jobs. hopefully that won't be the case next year.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby A&O » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:25 pm

this year's 3Ls might not have been the most forthcoming with advice because a lot of them were in direct competition with 2Ls for jobs.


(1) How can 3Ls be directly competing with 2Ls? The 3Ls would be starting in fall 2011, the 2Ls in fall 2012. The 3Ls won't be in the 2Ls summer classes, either. They're not competing for the same slots, so where is the direct competition?
(2) Even if there is "direct competition," how will next year be any different? 2Ls who struck out this year will be interviewing as 3Ls. Why would they be any more forthcoming?

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby vanwinkle » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:27 pm

It could just be that because striking out was more widespread last year, there was less consensus on why or what to do about it.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby A&O » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:28 pm

I'm not sure one causes the other.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby DoubleChecks » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:42 pm

A&O wrote:I'm not sure one causes the other.


yeah i dont know if 3L/2L interaction had much to do w/ the numbers either..sounds a bit like a stretch

i just dont really see anything wrong w/ the numbers. 391/~540 seems about right, esp. for LAST yr's OCI data (most likely worse than this yrs). if you start factoring in the ppl who got biglaw jobs by mass mailing, FIP, who didnt want biglaw jobs in the first place but went to OCI for the experience or as a backup to PI, etc., you get an even bigger bump to the ~72% i get from those numbers. if "traditional wisdom" has 2L OCI offer rates for those that want biglaw at ~80%...i dont see data as necessarily changing much.

User avatar
wiseowl
Posts: 1071
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby wiseowl » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:47 pm

A&O wrote:
this year's 3Ls might not have been the most forthcoming with advice because a lot of them were in direct competition with 2Ls for jobs.


(1) How can 3Ls be directly competing with 2Ls? The 3Ls would be starting in fall 2011, the 2Ls in fall 2012. The 3Ls won't be in the 2Ls summer classes, either. They're not competing for the same slots, so where is the direct competition?
(2) Even if there is "direct competition," how will next year be any different? 2Ls who struck out this year will be interviewing as 3Ls. Why would they be any more forthcoming?


I really don't think "class of ____", "class of ____" matters much anymore except for lockstep and bonus purposes. It's "associate we have to pay" or "associate we don't have to pay".

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby A&O » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:49 pm

I really don't think "class of ____", "class of ____" matters much anymore except for lockstep and bonus purposes. It's "associate we have to pay" or "associate we don't have to pay".


What? Of course it matters. Firms have different needs for one year from now as opposed to two years from now. The 3Ls in no way compete with the 2Ls.

User avatar
wiseowl
Posts: 1071
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 4:38 pm

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby wiseowl » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:51 pm

A&O wrote:
I really don't think "class of ____", "class of ____" matters much anymore except for lockstep and bonus purposes. It's "associate we have to pay" or "associate we don't have to pay".


What? Of course it matters. Firms have different needs for one year from now as opposed to two years from now. The 3Ls in no way compete with the 2Ls.


You're welcome to your opinion man. At my school's OCI, 2Ls and 3Ls were in the same interviewing rooms, and there's a finite number of slots. Whether you believe they compete down the road or not is one thing, but I can assure you that they were competing in bidding strategy at 2010 OCI.

A&O
Posts: 347
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 11:08 am

Re: Harvard moves EIP up, start of classes back

Postby A&O » Wed Dec 08, 2010 10:56 pm

At my school's OCI, 2Ls and 3Ls were in the same interviewing rooms, and there's a finite number of slots. Whether you believe they compete down the road or not is one thing, but I can assure you that they were competing in bidding strategy at 2010 OCI.


It's not so much opinion as it is common sense and logic.

(1) People using the same interviewing rooms are necessarily competing against each other? That makes no sense. Finite number of slots? I'm not sure you know how the mechanics of 3L recruiting work.
(2) At least at my school, when a firm indicates that it wants to interview 3Ls in addition to 2Ls, they set aside a certain amount of interview slots for 3Ls and 3Ls only. You think 3Ls compete with 3Ls and 2Ls for interview slots? No. When the lottery occurs, 3Ls just compete with other 3Ls who bid for the same slots. The 2Ls don't compete with 3Ls for those spots because those slots weren't for 2Ls to begin with.
(3) And using the same room to interview is not indicative of anything.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.