ballouttacontrol wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:3L lower T-14 below median sort of in the veil (summered plaintiff and they make hiring decisions much later on, like April). Sent out multiple resumes, but only recently was invited to my first mass-mail produced interview, with a well respected PL firm. That specific application happened to be mailed as opposed to sent via email like the others.
Just out of curiosity, have people had more luck with physically mailing applications? It's certainly more expensive ($6-7/application), but if it works, I would happily spend the money to get a higher return.
Haven't done this, but would be extremely surprised if it yielded different results than simply emailing. Keep in mind that mass-mailing is a huge numbers game. I sent out about 300 applications and didn't receive a single interview.
Original poster -- My reason for thinking this is also based on these application be directly mailed to managing partners as opposed to going through HR (many PL firms do not have huge HR/Recruiting dept. like defense firms do). I can see an email being seen as more annoying and easier to ignore when compared to a letter in the mail. This notion is more psychological than anything else, the idea being that people check there email on an on-going basis, so when they see an emailed resume they're not likely going to review it carefully so they can move on to the next email, but when mailed, there's a sense of a greater time horizon to review, giving the applicant a greater chance. This could all be wishful thinking though so just curious to think if this seems completely outlandish.
Edit: I should also note that the firm did not list email addresses so I didn't really have a choice but to mail, which obviously works against my premise that this could work across firms.
Original anon that replied to you. Can't speak as to how plaintiff's lit firms open their mail, but I don't think managing partners generally open their own mail. My guess is they do something similar to what my firm does - partner is busy, so secretary reads the mail, passes relevant stuff along to the partner. It is the secretary's job to run interference and take care of the small stuff. Accordingly, the secretary is going to play the same role as HR will if you email - both will run interference and keep stuff off the partners' desks.
Do secretaries typically screen partners email as well? Or only physical mail?
Partner email goes straight to them.
Not sure I would ever email straight to a partner though, personally
Hence why mail may be better — gets to the partner but not in such an intrusive way as an email. I'm looking specifically for New York, so have only emailed directly to partners in really small offices (10 or less) of otherwise bigger firms as they are unlikely hiring anyway, but you never know.