Employment Law Question Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:29 pm
Employment Law Question
So I am generally interested in employment law (worked for a judge this summer who had previously worked in this area). But as a 1L did not have an opportunity to take any employment related classes. If asked in an interview why employment law what are some good answers to this question? What is the best way to address it in an interview?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
Don't sweat it. Most 1Ls do not have a chance to take any non-core courses anyways, much less anything employment focused.gmr189 wrote:So I am generally interested in employment law (worked for a judge this summer who had previously worked in this area). But as a 1L did not have an opportunity to take any employment related classes. If asked in an interview why employment law what are some good answers to this question? What is the best way to address it in an interview?
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:29 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
anon168 wrote:Don't sweat it. Most 1Ls do not have a chance to take any non-core courses anyways, much less anything employment focused.gmr189 wrote:So I am generally interested in employment law (worked for a judge this summer who had previously worked in this area). But as a 1L did not have an opportunity to take any employment related classes. If asked in an interview why employment law what are some good answers to this question? What is the best way to address it in an interview?
Thanks, part of my reasoning is that I've worked with people with disabilities so thats one of the reasons I want to work in employment law, for the advocacy aspect. But the firms I'm interviewing with represent/counsel employers so I'm having trouble figuring out how to work that in to working for employers on these issues
- nevdash
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:01 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
The answer that I give as a 3L who's done a lot of work in employment discrimination is that it's one of the few areas of law (along with criminal law) where the cases revolve around real life stories from people about important events that affect their lives greatly (and it's probably the only area of law that you can practice at a big firm where that's true). That makes it much easier to become engaged in and care about your work than if you were doing, say, corporate law. I've given that answer to a bunch of employment law partners, and all of them seem to agree and say that they chose employment law for the same reason.
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:29 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
nevdash wrote:The answer that I give as a 3L who's done a lot of work in employment discrimination is that it's one of the few areas of law (along with criminal law) where the cases revolve around real life stories from people about important events that affect their lives greatly (and it's probably the only area of law that you can practice at a big firm where that's true). That makes it much easier to become engaged in and care about your work than if you were doing, say, corporate law. I've given that answer to a bunch of employment law partners, and all of them seem to agree and say that they chose employment law for the same reason.
Thanks! very helpful!
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Employment Law Question
Not OP here. Since we're on the topic of employment law, figured I'd ask a question of my own. One of the firms I'm interviewing with is Littler. I hear different things from different people about whether or not choosing Littler would permanently kill prospects of lateraling into a plaintiff-side office. Thoughts?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
Plaintiff's side for employees? Or just plaintiff's work in general?Anonymous User wrote:Not OP here. Since we're on the topic of employment law, figured I'd ask a question of my own. One of the firms I'm interviewing with is Littler. I hear different things from different people about whether or not choosing Littler would permanently kill prospects of lateraling into a plaintiff-side office. Thoughts?
-
- Posts: 428443
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Employment Law Question
Either I suppose. I have some legit employment stuff on my resume, but in the end I just want a job with lots of litigation in the courtroom. Littler seems to do a lot of that but it doesn't look like they keep people on board for partner tracks almost ever, and if I could eventually swing plaintiff then that would be cool.anon168 wrote:Plaintiff's side for employees? Or just plaintiff's work in general?Anonymous User wrote:Not OP here. Since we're on the topic of employment law, figured I'd ask a question of my own. One of the firms I'm interviewing with is Littler. I hear different things from different people about whether or not choosing Littler would permanently kill prospects of lateraling into a plaintiff-side office. Thoughts?
-
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm
Re: Employment Law Question
It won't foreclose it. It's harder to go the other way (employer to employee), then it is to go from defending employers and then switching to suing them.Anonymous User wrote:Either I suppose. I have some legit employment stuff on my resume, but in the end I just want a job with lots of litigation in the courtroom. Littler seems to do a lot of that but it doesn't look like they keep people on board for partner tracks almost ever, and if I could eventually swing plaintiff then that would be cool.anon168 wrote:Plaintiff's side for employees? Or just plaintiff's work in general?Anonymous User wrote:Not OP here. Since we're on the topic of employment law, figured I'd ask a question of my own. One of the firms I'm interviewing with is Littler. I hear different things from different people about whether or not choosing Littler would permanently kill prospects of lateraling into a plaintiff-side office. Thoughts?