Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:Anonymous User wrote:That said, I'm quite sure having worker-side labor/employment experience helps, whether that's with DoL during 2L summer or some other time during law school, other relevant agencies, or even plaintiff-side firms. Every DoL Honors attorney I've been able to google-stalk has substantial experience like this. (Lest you think I'm totally creepy, DoL published some kind of newsletter in the last year with an article about the Honors Program that provided lots of names to look up on LinkedIn.) A bigger question is whether you could get one of these positions without that kind of experience, and I don't know - it probably depends on who's doing the hiring, what else you bring to the table, and how well you can spin the latter as applicable to the job.
I think it's essentially impossible to get a DoL honors job without any employment law experience, based on the Honors attorneys I know and talk to, and the fact that they are only hiring a handful of people for an employment-law only job. I do know for a fact that it's possible to get an honors position without having interned at the DoL itself.
Yeah. My interviewer said they're basically trying to do a couple things. One is ferret out people with little to no employment law experience, and also try to gauge your commitment to public interest work.
Do you think those two criteria are the most important in the evaluation process? As opposed to grades, law school prestige, etc.? Obviously, at this point, its all conjecture–but does anyone know how candidates were evaluated in the past?