No-offered summer associate. FML Forum

[sunynp]

I'm sorry you are in this situation. It probably was for fit or maybe someone just didn't like you for whatever trivial reason. This way they can claim to have some objective criteria to use, even though it is total bullshit.

I suppose it could be because they over hired and just wanted to cut someone loose now.

What is your strategy for finding another job? Will they give you references? Do you have any partners who might help you out?

Is it at all possible you were less driven then the other summers? Maybe they were concerned about your work ethic? Im not sure speculating matters.

One thing I know from my firm- if you make mistakes at the beginning it can hurt you. Reputations for good or bad are earned very quickly. A bad error can follow you reputation wise and you may never even know about it. Ask in the interviewers thread for their thought on this. It can be difficult for an associate to overcome a bad impression, even if that impression is totAly undeserved.

I don't think firms should promise jobs and then renege. It is dishonest.. But some people arent interested enough in an SA future career to tell them they have issues with thief work product. Attorneys arent really trained to be managers like that and assosciates are often pressed for time.

When I was an SA two peopl got no offered- one a very senior partner just didn't like - she may have not done the work as fast as his crazy standards required . She never was told the reason- she met deadlines, just not as quickly as he wanted. Guy is a known lunatic.

The other person just never fit in. She also had some less major opposition from a junior partner. She was not weird in any sense ; she just didn't seem as together or as ambitious. When she got no offered she completely freaked out and tried to go from floor to floor in hysterics. They actually cut off her key card access and she still stalked the firm. So I guess she was a little tightly wound/ unstable. She did get a job with a less of sweatshop firm.
I think that none of her hysteria was ever reported to another firm.

[itbdvorm]

I'm sorry you are in this situation. It probably was for fit or maybe someone just didn't like you for whatever trivial reason. This way they can claim to have some objective criteria to use, even though it is total bullshit.

I suppose it could be because they over hired and just wanted to cut someone loose now.

What is your strategy for finding another job? Will they give you references? Do you have any partners who might help you out?

Is it at all possible you were less driven then the other summers? Maybe they were concerned about your work ethic? Im not sure speculating matters.

One thing I know from my firm- if you make mistakes at the beginning it can hurt you. Reputations for good or bad are earned very quickly. A bad error can follow you reputation wise and you may never even know about it. Ask in the interviewers thread for their thought on this. It can be difficult for an associate to overcome a bad impression, even if that impression is totAly undeserved.

I don't think firms should promise jobs and then renege. It is dishonest.. But some people arent interested enough in an SA future career to tell them they have issues with thief work product. Attorneys arent really trained to be managers like that and assosciates are often pressed for time.

When I was an SA two peopl got no offered- one a very senior partner just didn't like - she may have not done the work as fast as his crazy standards required . She never was told the reason- she met deadlines, just not as quickly as he wanted. Guy is a known lunatic.

The other person just never fit in. She also had some less major opposition from a junior partner. She was not weird in any sense ; she just didn't seem as together or as ambitious. When she got no offered she completely freaked out and tried to go from floor to floor in hysterics. They actually cut off her key card access and she still stalked the firm. So I guess she was a little tightly wound/ unstable. She did get a job with a less of sweatshop firm.
I think that none of her hysteria was ever reported to another firm.

the folks who got no offered in this thread - really sorry to hear that. feel free to PM me for advice.

i will say, based upon a quick skim of this thread, in no particular order:

I have seen grades sink a candidate. Usually it's not enough by itself, but grades mixed with work product and/or fit issues can be a tipper. Especially when (a) grades weren't stellar / close to the cut to begin with or (b) it's a big drop.

Another possibility is for a transfer student to only do OK at the new school. While your grades may seem "fine", if the cut at the new school is top 25% or so and you're in the top 40% range, that's an issue.

I would be pretty surprised if, as Fresh Prince suggests, Latham goes "below median" other than at maybe a handful of schools. A friend of mine got rejected trying to lateral there because his grades weren't up to snuff (and was at a "peer firm").

But in all probability, yes, there was some sort of issue. Maybe you didn't realize it, maybe it's fixable, maybe you'll need some sort of detour. Put the rage aside for now and try to figure out how to move forward...

[Anonymous User]

I'm sorry you are in this situation. It probably was for fit or maybe someone just didn't like you for whatever trivial reason. This way they can claim to have some objective criteria to use, even though it is total bullshit.

I suppose it could be because they over hired and just wanted to cut someone loose now.

What is your strategy for finding another job? Will they give you references? Do you have any partners who might help you out?

Is it at all possible you were less driven then the other summers? Maybe they were concerned about your work ethic? Im not sure speculating matters.

One thing I know from my firm- if you make mistakes at the beginning it can hurt you. Reputations for good or bad are earned very quickly. A bad error can follow you reputation wise and you may never even know about it. Ask in the interviewers thread for their thought on this. It can be difficult for an associate to overcome a bad impression, even if that impression is totAly undeserved.

I don't think firms should promise jobs and then renege. It is dishonest.. But some people arent interested enough in an SA future career to tell them they have issues with thief work product. Attorneys arent really trained to be managers like that and assosciates are often pressed for time.

When I was an SA two peopl got no offered- one a very senior partner just didn't like - she may have not done the work as fast as his crazy standards required . She never was told the reason- she met deadlines, just not as quickly as he wanted. Guy is a known lunatic.

The other person just never fit in. She also had some less major opposition from a junior partner. She was not weird in any sense ; she just didn't seem as together or as ambitious. When she got no offered she completely freaked out and tried to go from floor to floor in hysterics. They actually cut off her key card access and she still stalked the firm. So I guess she was a little tightly wound/ unstable. She did get a job with a less of sweatshop firm.
I think that none of her hysteria was ever reported to another firm.

Thank you. This is very helpful. I received an offer from my firm but am afraid to return because I felt like certain partners had unrealistic expectations for the quality of work one can do within certain deadlines. Other SAs had worked with them as well and had similar feedback. Moreover, I know I will be working with these partners if I return (and have no latitude to switch). Does this mean that I will be in the office 15-17 hours a day to meet their deadlines going forward, or else risk getting axed by the firm early on in my career despite having made the SA cut?

FWIW, I think an extreme need for new associates and their satisfaction with the quality (but not timing or quantity) of my work contributed to my getting an offer (along with the fact that the "missed" deadlines were fake internal deadlines for which I was reluctantly granted extensions), but the 15-17s hour a day in the office thing on a fairly regular basis is not sustainable for me long term, or even for a year or two. (Before anyone jumps and says it's just biglaw generally, I'll say that many associates at said firm seem to spend around 12 hours in the office.)

I do think I can become more efficient to some extent, but to have met those expected deadlines would have probably resulted in my overlooking parts of relevant law, rather than just sacrificing writing quality. And again, other SAs had similar experiences with these partners.

[reformed calvinist]

I'm sorry you are in this situation. It probably was for fit or maybe someone just didn't like you for whatever trivial reason. This way they can claim to have some objective criteria to use, even though it is total bullshit.

I suppose it could be because they over hired and just wanted to cut someone loose now.

What is your strategy for finding another job? Will they give you references? Do you have any partners who might help you out?

Is it at all possible you were less driven then the other summers? Maybe they were concerned about your work ethic? Im not sure speculating matters.

One thing I know from my firm- if you make mistakes at the beginning it can hurt you. Reputations for good or bad are earned very quickly. A bad error can follow you reputation wise and you may never even know about it. Ask in the interviewers thread for their thought on this. It can be difficult for an associate to overcome a bad impression, even if that impression is totAly undeserved.

I don't think firms should promise jobs and then renege. It is dishonest.. But some people arent interested enough in an SA future career to tell them they have issues with thief work product. Attorneys arent really trained to be managers like that and assosciates are often pressed for time.

When I was an SA two peopl got no offered- one a very senior partner just didn't like - she may have not done the work as fast as his crazy standards required . She never was told the reason- she met deadlines, just not as quickly as he wanted. Guy is a known lunatic.

The other person just never fit in. She also had some less major opposition from a junior partner. She was not weird in any sense ; she just didn't seem as together or as ambitious. When she got no offered she completely freaked out and tried to go from floor to floor in hysterics. They actually cut off her key card access and she still stalked the firm. So I guess she was a little tightly wound/ unstable. She did get a job with a less of sweatshop firm.
I think that none of her hysteria was ever reported to another firm.

the folks who got no offered in this thread - really sorry to hear that. feel free to PM me for advice.

i will say, based upon a quick skim of this thread, in no particular order:

I have seen grades sink a candidate. Usually it's not enough by itself, but grades mixed with work product and/or fit issues can be a tipper. Especially when (a) grades weren't stellar / close to the cut to begin with or (b) it's a big drop.

Another possibility is for a transfer student to only do OK at the new school. While your grades may seem "fine", if the cut at the new school is top 25% or so and you're in the top 40% range, that's an issue.

I would be pretty surprised if, as Fresh Prince suggests, Latham goes "below median" other than at maybe a handful of schools. A friend of mine got rejected trying to lateral there because his grades weren't up to snuff (and was at a "peer firm").

But in all probability, yes, there was some sort of issue. Maybe you didn't realize it, maybe it's fixable, maybe you'll need some sort of detour. Put the rage aside for now and try to figure out how to move forward...

Wait, grades matter for lateraling? No wonder so many firms have been going under

[zuluwarriors]

it seems like there are a lot more of these fit/grades/1-mistake no offers this year than last. it could be that i just wasn't paying attention last year because i was starting 3L year whereas now i sit at home post-bar doing nothing. in any case, could the unexplained no offers this year be due to the slow down in corporate work? i know corporate at the firm i'm going to is extremely slow right now, and there appears to be much more no offers this year than last.

for those who got no offered - did you have a strong preference for corporate? if so, that could explain some things... was there anyone in a "hot" field (such as IP lit) that got an unexplained no offer?

[Anonymous User]

I'm sorry you are in this situation. It probably was for fit or maybe someone just didn't like you for whatever trivial reason. This way they can claim to have some objective criteria to use, even though it is total bullshit.

I suppose it could be because they over hired and just wanted to cut someone loose now.

What is your strategy for finding another job? Will they give you references? Do you have any partners who might help you out?

Is it at all possible you were less driven then the other summers? Maybe they were concerned about your work ethic? Im not sure speculating matters.

Well the plan at this point is hustle like crazy for a clerkship. I'm asking around for letters of rec/references -- presumably I'll be able to get one from someone.

I think the work ethic was part of it. I was told I didn't take enough notes when getting assignments, so that was taken as a lack of interest in my work, I think.

Anyway, thanks to those who have been sympathetic...it makes the pity party less lonely.

[Anonymous User]

Texas is a different story. There economy is just in another world from the rest of the country. I'm going to take a lot of heat for this but I'm going to say it anyway. In this economy UT is a better school than about half of the top 14. Getting a job is about more than a school's nationwide reputation and prestige. Because of the Texas job economy, the way that Texas treats UT, and the way that they treat people with no ties to the state that don't attend a Texas school, and the COL in Texas, UT is better than some of the top 14.

For someone who is accusing others of talking out their ass, you sure do like to do it yourself. Your argument is objectively incorrect based on the job data available to us.

Knock yourself out:

http://www.lawschooltransparency.com/
http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... AW_SCHOOLS

Sure, if you're from Texas and/or have a big scholarship, then maybe. But all things being equal, UT is not better for jobs than the T14.

FYI, UT only places about 20% of the class in big law and about 15% in clerkships + PI. You realistically need to be in the top third or at least the top 40% to have any reasonable chance of getting a decent paying job. Nearly half the class of 2012 entered 3L without jobs. As far as law schools go, this isn't terrible. However, it places UT in the same group as UCLA, Vanderbilt, and USC--not the "T14."

In addition, Texas firms regularly take below-median students from Georgetown and Cornell, not to mention Penn. Basically, even if you want to work in Texas, UT is NOT a good choice UNLESS they offer you significantly more money than superior T14 schools that place better even in Texas. Given equal $$, I would say T14 > Vanderbilt > UT > UCLA > USC

You also sound like a non-Texan. Let me say this: I feel really bad for out-of-state classmates who came here just to chase rank, pay sticker, and have no ties to the state. They are not going to get jobs here--barring exceptional circumstances, and currently, UT's placement in NYC/CA is worse than shit (better be top 10% + LR even for NYC V30's, and most NYC firms that interview at UT, oddly, are V15's)

I went to UT because it's my native state school, and I got a full ride. I almost paid sticker at CCN instead. It was admittedly a tough choice.

[Anonymous User]

So this isn't intended to berate no-offered C/O 2013 folks. Feel so sorry for you guys. This is for the edification of C/O 2014 kids who still have their SA's coming up.

It's a little disingenuous to think a firm that no-offers 2 of 20 SA's did it for economic reasons. If a firm readjusts it's hiring that late in the game, it'll be because of a much more substantial change in economics than whatever is saved by no-offering 2 SA's. Heck, often these same firms are recruiting 3L's after no-offering people. This isn't C/O 2010, where firms were offering 50-70% of their SA's and you could blame no-offers on economics. Offer rates might be a touch lower than in the last two years, but that's because firms were maintaining 100% offer rates the last couple of years as a recruiting signal. If we're returning to the ~95% range, that's more in line with the pre-recession offer rates. And if offer rates this year are in the 95% range, that's probably 300 no-offered SA's, most of whom probably think they were no-offered for economic reasons...

The fact is that an SA is a 10 week interview. As an SA, you're given a lot of rope when it comes to taking a long time to do assignments and making substantive mistakes. At the same time, you're evaluated very strictly along other dimensions, in many cases much more strictly than you will be as associates. E.g. you never argue with a partner as an SA. That's not because partners are dictators and expect associates to never argue with them. It's because it's against job interview protocol. Firms don't want to hire people who can't follow protocol.

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. Proofread. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

[snailio]

So this isn't intended to berate no-offered C/O 2013 folks. Feel so sorry for you guys. This is for the edification of C/O 2014 kids who still have their SA's coming up.

It's a little disingenuous to think a firm that no-offers 2 of 20 SA's did it for economic reasons. If a firm readjusts it's hiring that late in the game, it'll be because of a much more substantial change in economics than whatever is saved by no-offering 2 SA's. Heck, often these same firms are recruiting 3L's after no-offering people. This isn't C/O 2010, where firms were offering 50-70% of their SA's and you could blame no-offers on economics. Offer rates might be a touch lower than in the last two years, but that's because firms were maintaining 100% offer rates the last couple of years as a recruiting signal. If we're returning to the ~95% range, that's more in line with the pre-recession offer rates. And if offer rates this year are in the 95% range, that's probably 300 no-offered SA's, most of whom probably think they were no-offered for economic reasons...

The fact is that an SA is a 10 week interview. As an SA, you're given a lot of rope when it comes to taking a long time to do assignments and making substantive mistakes. At the same time, you're evaluated very strictly along other dimensions, in many cases much more strictly than you will be as associates. E.g. you never argue with a partner as an SA. That's not because partners are dictators and expect associates to never argue with them. It's because it's against job interview protocol. Firms don't want to hire people who can't follow protocol.

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD, PROOFREAD. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

Fixed.

[Anonymous User]

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. Proofread. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

I want to echo what this anon is saying. I SA'ed at one of the firms mentioned in this thread. One of us in my office was no-offered. This person believes s/he was no-offered because of one or two bad assignments at the beginning of the summer. If s/he were to post here, s/he would say the firm's decision was BS, that the firm is TTT and must be headed down the Dewey path.

In reality, this person struggled to keep up with a fairly meager SA workload all summer. I don't have direct knowledge of his/her work product, but about six weeks in s/he stopped appearing in the "To:" line of the "do any of you have time for another assignment" emails. S/he dressed inappropriately, was rude to the staff, didn't show up to social events, and complained to partners about the work being assigned. S/he was generally abrasive and no fun to be around. As harsh as it sounds, I breathed a sigh of relief when I heard I wouldn't have to work with him/her next year.

When you're making decisions about callbacks and SA offers, take these no-offer stories with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that some of the folks here have legitimate gripes, and my heart goes out to them all. But if somebody's oblivious enough not to follow basic social protocol in June, s/he's probably oblivious enough not to understand what went wrong come August.

[Anonymous User]

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. Proofread. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

I want to echo what this anon is saying. I SA'ed at one of the firms mentioned in this thread. One of us in my office was no-offered. This person believes s/he was no-offered because of one or two bad assignments at the beginning of the summer. If s/he were to post here, s/he would say the firm's decision was BS, that the firm is TTT and must be headed down the Dewey path.

In reality, this person struggled to keep up with a fairly meager SA workload all summer. I don't have direct knowledge of his/her work product, but about six weeks in s/he stopped appearing in the "To:" line of the "do any of you have time for another assignment" emails. S/he dressed inappropriately, was rude to the staff, didn't show up to social events, and complained to partners about the work being assigned. S/he was generally abrasive and no fun to be around. As harsh as it sounds, I breathed a sigh of relief when I heard I wouldn't have to work with him/her next year.

When you're making decisions about callbacks and SA offers, take these no-offer stories with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that some of the folks here have legitimate gripes, and my heart goes out to them all. But if somebody's oblivious enough not to follow basic social protocol in June, s/he's probably oblivious enough not to understand what went wrong come August.

Must be nice to look down from your shiny pedestal.

[Anonymous User]

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. Proofread. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

I want to echo what this anon is saying. I SA'ed at one of the firms mentioned in this thread. One of us in my office was no-offered. This person believes s/he was no-offered because of one or two bad assignments at the beginning of the summer. If s/he were to post here, s/he would say the firm's decision was BS, that the firm is TTT and must be headed down the Dewey path.

In reality, this person struggled to keep up with a fairly meager SA workload all summer. I don't have direct knowledge of his/her work product, but about six weeks in s/he stopped appearing in the "To:" line of the "do any of you have time for another assignment" emails. S/he dressed inappropriately, was rude to the staff, didn't show up to social events, and complained to partners about the work being assigned. S/he was generally abrasive and no fun to be around. As harsh as it sounds, I breathed a sigh of relief when I heard I wouldn't have to work with him/her next year.

When you're making decisions about callbacks and SA offers, take these no-offer stories with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that some of the folks here have legitimate gripes, and my heart goes out to them all. But if somebody's oblivious enough not to follow basic social protocol in June, s/he's probably oblivious enough not to understand what went wrong come August.

Totally agree with you. There was definitely "that guy/girl" who was just oblivious to how much of a fuck up they were being. Firms know that a big part of retention is building a community where people can at least tolerate each other, and I don't know that I could have stood to work with one of my fellow SAs. Who knows what happened to the people ITT, but the aspie factor was a huge deal at my firm over the summer, and I know those people are now thinking that they got no offered based on grades or work product.

Seriously, people need to have a serious conversation with trusted friends (or an ex-significant other for best effect) about situations in which one is a douche. You may be a massive douche and not even know it. Fix it before it is too late.

[Anonymous User]

Totally agree with you. There was definitely "that guy/girl" who was just oblivious to how much of a fuck up they were being. Firms know that a big part of retention is building a community where people can at least tolerate each other, and I don't know that I could have stood to work with one of my fellow SAs. Who knows what happened to the people ITT, but the aspie factor was a huge deal at my firm over the summer, and I know those people are now thinking that they got no offered based on grades or work product.

Seriously, people need to have a serious conversation with trusted friends (or an ex-significant other for best effect) about situations in which one is a douche. You may be a massive douche and not even know it. Fix it before it is too late.

Unfortunately, "that guy" was my office mate this summer, but he got an offer anyway. All the SAs knew he was a hot mess, but he was a big suckup. Ten weeks isn't long enough, I guess. I'm considering entering a different department partially so that I don't have to work with him again. I'm sure he was teh guy who loudly answered his phone during OCI in front of anyone when getting a CB. My main feedback to the firm was to try harder to match office mates based on personality. I guess no one would have matched well with him.

[Anonymous User]

Totally agree with you. There was definitely "that guy/girl" who was just oblivious to how much of a fuck up they were being. Firms know that a big part of retention is building a community where people can at least tolerate each other, and I don't know that I could have stood to work with one of my fellow SAs. Who knows what happened to the people ITT, but the aspie factor was a huge deal at my firm over the summer, and I know those people are now thinking that they got no offered based on grades or work product.

Seriously, people need to have a serious conversation with trusted friends (or an ex-significant other for best effect) about situations in which one is a douche. You may be a massive douche and not even know it. Fix it before it is too late.

Unfortunately, "that guy" was my office mate this summer, but he got an offer anyway. All the SAs knew he was a hot mess, but he was a big suckup. Ten weeks isn't long enough, I guess. I'm considering entering a different department partially so that I don't have to work with him again. I'm sure he was teh guy who loudly answered his phone during OCI in front of anyone when getting a CB. My main feedback to the firm was to try harder to match office mates based on personality. I guess no one would have matched well with him.

Also know a "that guy" who got an offer.

[BruceWayne]

There are pretty much no kids in my class that were well below median (bottom 20%) that got biglaw, unless their uncle is a partner, they were ibankers, or they were IP. Even then, I had friends struggle till the last week in october before they got something. I have a friend who networked his ass off, got callbacks at huge nyc firms with shit grades and had multiple hiring partners call him to say that everyone really liked him, but that unless he has a legit reason, his grades just dont cut it. I honestly think you are dead wrong and I think it's easy to say this when you have the luxury of an IP gig or you worked for a client of the firm for 3 years.

Yeah it's the same at my top 10. And I really appreciate that you didn't throw in URM onto that exception list--it shows that you're probably a 3L or a grad. FYI I had interviewers/partners tell me the EXACT same thing--except that there really was no legit reason excuse exception allowed. Hell I know people who were dropped AFTER summering because of GPA decreases.

look, man, you are extrapolating from your own experience onto everyone. it's not like bottom 20% is a rosy place to be for anyone, but 92% of people got offers at EIP at CLS last year. that (obviously) included some some bottom 20% people. (yes, not everyone did EIP but lots of the people who opted out were people with median or better grades who wanted PI or gov).

and URM can help below median people. i personally know three URMs at CLS who were bottom 20% after 1L who landed V100 jobs (two of them V50). yes, anecdotes are anecdotes, but if your blanket statements were true, then these people would've had no hope because these were below supposed hard cutoffs.

That 92 % epi is TLS rumor. If you look at the nlj stats not even 80 percent of CLS has a firm job.

And I'm afraid, by and large, you're wrong. Most people below median at top 14 (excluding HYS) do not get biglaw. I know a ton of people below median at UVA, almost none of them have a firm job. The one's that do had serious professional work experience, wrote onto law review, are bilingual or have major connections. A TON of people graduated last May with no job. Many of them are URM. Sorry but TLS's glamourizing of the top 14 (with the exception of HYS) as being schools were grades don't prevent you from unemployment--are just internet circle jerking. Bad grades--barring IP or exceptional connections means no firm job and lucky to get anything quite frankly. Something like 30 percent of the class of 2012 is working via the PI "fellowship" that UVA does. The bottom line is that firms have VERY hard cutoffs which they will not go below barring incredible connections or IP.

[Perseus_I]

There are pretty much no kids in my class that were well below median (bottom 20%) that got biglaw, unless their uncle is a partner, they were ibankers, or they were IP. Even then, I had friends struggle till the last week in october before they got something. I have a friend who networked his ass off, got callbacks at huge nyc firms with shit grades and had multiple hiring partners call him to say that everyone really liked him, but that unless he has a legit reason, his grades just dont cut it. I honestly think you are dead wrong and I think it's easy to say this when you have the luxury of an IP gig or you worked for a client of the firm for 3 years.

Yeah it's the same at my top 10. And I really appreciate that you didn't throw in URM onto that exception list--it shows that you're probably a 3L or a grad. FYI I had interviewers/partners tell me the EXACT same thing--except that there really was no legit reason excuse exception allowed. Hell I know people who were dropped AFTER summering because of GPA decreases.

look, man, you are extrapolating from your own experience onto everyone. it's not like bottom 20% is a rosy place to be for anyone, but 92% of people got offers at EIP at CLS last year. that (obviously) included some some bottom 20% people. (yes, not everyone did EIP but lots of the people who opted out were people with median or better grades who wanted PI or gov).

and URM can help below median people. i personally know three URMs at CLS who were bottom 20% after 1L who landed V100 jobs (two of them V50). yes, anecdotes are anecdotes, but if your blanket statements were true, then these people would've had no hope because these were below supposed hard cutoffs.

That 92 % epi is TLS rumor. If you look at the nlj stats not even 80 percent of CLS has a firm job.

And I'm afraid, by and large, you're wrong. Most people below median at top 14 (excluding HYS) do not get biglaw. I know a ton of people below median at UVA, almost none of them have a firm job. The one's that do had serious professional work experience, wrote onto law review, are bilingual or have major connections. A TON of people graduated last May with no job. Many of them are URM. Sorry but TLS's glamourizing of the top 14 (with the exception of HYS) as being schools were grades don't prevent you from unemployment--are just internet circle jerking. Bad grades--barring IP or exceptional connections means no firm job and lucky to get anything quite frankly. Something like 30 percent of the class of 2012 is working via the PI "fellowship" that UVA does. The bottom line is that firms have VERY hard cutoffs which they will not go below barring incredible connections or IP.

61% get a big firm job, then add clerkships (8%) + PI (14%) would add up to 83%. Subtract 8% for "school funded" jobs, and you get to 75%. So the bottom 25% at CLS is fucked. --LinkRemoved--

Of course, some people work for small firms. Some of those pay really well (Susman Godfrey), and some don't. So maybe it's more likely that the bottom 20% is fucked. However, "at least 57.2% of this school's graduates made $160,000 or more," so at least a few below-median students got big law.

[Anonymous User]

Nobody will tell you the details of the protocol, but if you have any common sense at all you can figure it out. Get to work on time. Don't leave early. Don't take any vacations during the SA. Don't argue with partners. Don't argue with associates. Don't complain. Smile when you get work. Don't miss deadlines. Proofread. Ask questions when you don't understand something. Don't be arrogant. Don't be inappropriate. Don't be weird. For god's sake don't be weird. Don't put people in awkward situations. Dress appropriately. This sounds like it's not that hard, and it isn't. But in a group of 20 SA's, there are guaranteed to be at least a couple of people who argue with partners or turn in work that has glaring and obvious errors.

I want to echo what this anon is saying. I SA'ed at one of the firms mentioned in this thread. One of us in my office was no-offered. This person believes s/he was no-offered because of one or two bad assignments at the beginning of the summer. If s/he were to post here, s/he would say the firm's decision was BS, that the firm is TTT and must be headed down the Dewey path.

In reality, this person struggled to keep up with a fairly meager SA workload all summer. I don't have direct knowledge of his/her work product, but about six weeks in s/he stopped appearing in the "To:" line of the "do any of you have time for another assignment" emails. S/he dressed inappropriately, was rude to the staff, didn't show up to social events, and complained to partners about the work being assigned. S/he was generally abrasive and no fun to be around. As harsh as it sounds, I breathed a sigh of relief when I heard I wouldn't have to work with him/her next year.

When you're making decisions about callbacks and SA offers, take these no-offer stories with a grain of salt. I don't doubt that some of the folks here have legitimate gripes, and my heart goes out to them all. But if somebody's oblivious enough not to follow basic social protocol in June, s/he's probably oblivious enough not to understand what went wrong come August.

Must be nice to look down from your shiny pedestal.

What are you talking about? On a macro level, I agree, some people aren't awkward and got fucked. But on a micro level, the person this individual talked about, sounds like they deserved it

[Anonymous User]

This is a thread of about no-offers. We don't give a shit about the relative worth of UT. Take that conversation elsewhere.

I was no offered for work product. The work itself was good, but timeliness and communication were an issue. All my reviews were good, but most featured negatives touching on the above issues. No personality or fit problems. Basically, I failed to communicate when I ran into roadblocks, and silently blew several deadlines as a result. That's a deadly combo. This happened because I had a difficult assignment early on that destroyed my confidence for the rest of the summer. I couldn't seem to give the notoriously difficult partner what she wanted, so I spent an inordinate amount of time agonizing about this thing at the expense of my other projects, instead just producing something, turning it in, and moving on.

I mostly blame myself. I knew I was under performing and saw the no-offer coming from miles away. That said, I do feel that it was a bit unfair to ask this work of a summer. It was an objectively difficult and novel issue, and we were on the wrong side of whatever little case law there was. I felt like I was tasked with squeezing water from a stone -- and that saying there was no water was unacceptable. The senior associate who worked on the same issue in the lower court (and no longer involved) was disgusted by the case. He told me it was one of the most difficult things he'd ever worked on. He had done previously done all the research he could, but the partner was not happy. Why give this to a summer then? Well, here is the answer that I found out much later in the summer: client's budget was extremely tight, and the partner was overjoyed at the opportunity to pass this work on to a summer whose billing rates are low or nil. So while I most certainly could have done many things better (namely, avoid obsessing about this project and complete my other work on time), I do feel I got a bit screwed.

The key to understanding what I went through is realizing that I didn't know any of this (difficult partner, very challenging issue even for a senior associate) when I got the assignment. All I knew was that I was tasked with finding a solution to this problem in my first couple of weeks as a "lawyer in the real world" and despite my best efforts, I was failing, failing, failing.

The real lesson here is to go back to the assignor with your dead ends and explain why they are dead ends (i.e., "I tried to apply this doctrine but it doesn't work because etc... I looked into this line of cases, but they are adverse because... etc.") instead of feeling like you have to find a path. It's too bad that this valuable lesson cost me the summer and possibly much more.

Just a cautionary tale for future summers (and against this pervasive idea that summer work is mostly BS work: our assignments were all real and mostly substantive work).

[Anonymous User]

Totally agree with you. There was definitely "that guy/girl" who was just oblivious to how much of a fuck up they were being. Firms know that a big part of retention is building a community where people can at least tolerate each other, and I don't know that I could have stood to work with one of my fellow SAs. Who knows what happened to the people ITT, but the aspie factor was a huge deal at my firm over the summer, and I know those people are now thinking that they got no offered based on grades or work product.

Seriously, people need to have a serious conversation with trusted friends (or an ex-significant other for best effect) about situations in which one is a douche. You may be a massive douche and not even know it. Fix it before it is too late.

Unfortunately, "that guy" was my office mate this summer, but he got an offer anyway. All the SAs knew he was a hot mess, but he was a big suckup. Ten weeks isn't long enough, I guess. I'm considering entering a different department partially so that I don't have to work with him again. I'm sure he was teh guy who loudly answered his phone during OCI in front of anyone when getting a CB. My main feedback to the firm was to try harder to match office mates based on personality. I guess no one would have matched well with him.

Also know a "that guy" who got an offer.

"That guy" got an offer and I didn't. I was generally respected and liked as far as I know, volunteered for tons more work and received positive feedback. Don't even know what to think.

[JazzOne]

This is a thread of about no-offers. We don't give a shit about the relative worth of UT. Take that conversation elsewhere.

I was no offered for work product. The work itself was good, but timeliness and communication were an issue. All my reviews were good, but most featured negatives touching on the above issues. No personality or fit problems. Basically, I failed to communicate when I ran into roadblocks, and silently blew several deadlines as a result. That's a deadly combo. This happened because I had a difficult assignment early on that destroyed my confidence for the rest of the summer. I couldn't seem to give the notoriously difficult partner what she wanted, so I spent an inordinate amount of time agonizing about this thing at the expense of my other projects, instead just producing something, turning it in, and moving on.

I mostly blame myself. I knew I was under performing and saw the no-offer coming from miles away. That said, I do feel that it was a bit unfair to ask this work of a summer. It was an objectively difficult and novel issue, and we were on the wrong side of whatever little case law there was. I felt like I was tasked with squeezing water from a stone -- and that saying there was no water was unacceptable. The senior associate who worked on the same issue in the lower court (and no longer involved) was disgusted by the case. He told me it was one of the most difficult things he'd ever worked on. He had done previously done all the research he could, but the partner was not happy. Why give this to a summer then? Well, here is the answer that I found out much later in the summer: client's budget was extremely tight, and the partner was overjoyed at the opportunity to pass this work on to a summer whose billing rates are low or nil. So while I most certainly could have done many things better (namely, avoid obsessing about this project and complete my other work on time), I do feel I got a bit screwed.

The key to understanding what I went through is realizing that I didn't know any of this (difficult partner, very challenging issue even for a senior associate) when I got the assignment. All I knew was that I was tasked with finding a solution to this problem in my first couple of weeks as a "lawyer in the real world" and despite my best efforts, I was failing, failing, failing.

The real lesson here is to go back to the assignor with your dead ends and explain why they are dead ends (i.e., "I tried to apply this doctrine but it doesn't work because etc... I looked into this line of cases, but they are adverse because... etc.") instead of feeling like you have to find a path. It's too bad that this valuable lesson cost me the summer and possibly much more.

Just a cautionary tale for future summers (and against this pervasive idea that summer work is mostly BS work: our assignments were all real and mostly substantive work).

+1

Well said. Wish you hadn't posted anon. No shame in learning from your mistakes.

[Anonymous User]

This is a thread of about no-offers. We don't give a shit about the relative worth of UT. Take that conversation elsewhere.

I was no offered for work product. The work itself was good, but timeliness and communication were an issue. All my reviews were good, but most featured negatives touching on the above issues. No personality or fit problems. Basically, I failed to communicate when I ran into roadblocks, and silently blew several deadlines as a result. That's a deadly combo. This happened because I had a difficult assignment early on that destroyed my confidence for the rest of the summer. I couldn't seem to give the notoriously difficult partner what she wanted, so I spent an inordinate amount of time agonizing about this thing at the expense of my other projects, instead just producing something, turning it in, and moving on.

I mostly blame myself. I knew I was under performing and saw the no-offer coming from miles away. That said, I do feel that it was a bit unfair to ask this work of a summer. It was an objectively difficult and novel issue, and we were on the wrong side of whatever little case law there was. I felt like I was tasked with squeezing water from a stone -- and that saying there was no water was unacceptable. The senior associate who worked on the same issue in the lower court (and no longer involved) was disgusted by the case. He told me it was one of the most difficult things he'd ever worked on. He had done previously done all the research he could, but the partner was not happy. Why give this to a summer then? Well, here is the answer that I found out much later in the summer: client's budget was extremely tight, and the partner was overjoyed at the opportunity to pass this work on to a summer whose billing rates are low or nil. So while I most certainly could have done many things better (namely, avoid obsessing about this project and complete my other work on time), I do feel I got a bit screwed.

The key to understanding what I went through is realizing that I didn't know any of this (difficult partner, very challenging issue even for a senior associate) when I got the assignment. All I knew was that I was tasked with finding a solution to this problem in my first couple of weeks as a "lawyer in the real world" and despite my best efforts, I was failing, failing, failing.

The real lesson here is to go back to the assignor with your dead ends and explain why they are dead ends (i.e., "I tried to apply this doctrine but it doesn't work because etc... I looked into this line of cases, but they are adverse because... etc.") instead of feeling like you have to find a path. It's too bad that this valuable lesson cost me the summer and possibly much more.

Just a cautionary tale for future summers (and against this pervasive idea that summer work is mostly BS work: our assignments were all real and mostly substantive work).

This is excellent advice. I think it's rare for a single assignment to sink you, but one dissatisfied partner without offsetting positive reviews from others can be fatal.

For future SA's: you'll encounter "hard" problems as an SA. When that happens, you're not expected to find an answer that isn't there. You're expected to give an answer that's useful to the assigning attorney. If there is no good answer, you need to be thorough and explain all the avenues you explored and how they came up dead ends. You need to find the closest thing if it exists, keeping in mind the overall context of the assignment (if the attorney doesn't tell you this, ask). Out yourself in the assigning attorney's shoes. What would you want?

Sometimes a partner will be unreasonable. But lawyers are by temperament logical. If you convey you did a thorough job looking in the right places, they'll take "there is no answer" as an answer. But always keep in communication. If you wait till the deadline to report there is no answer, you'll take the assigning attorney by surprise. If you were the assigning attorney, wouldn't you want to know earlier so you could maybe try a slightly different angle, etc? You wouldn't want an SA to wait till the deadline because you expect if he's been chugging that long he found an answer and is writing it up.

[Anonymous User]

So is it like this for cb interviews also? One bad interviewing partner can sink you?

[Anonymous User]

So is it like this for cb interviews also? One bad interviewing partner can sink you?

Duh

[JazzOne]

Can you get no offered for grades?

[Anonymous User]

Most people below median at top 14 (excluding HYS) do not get biglaw.

I'm at UChicago. I can guarantee that a majority of the C/O 2013 people below median at my school got biglaw summer gigs.