As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

(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.
???
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:15 pm

As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby ??? » Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:17 pm

A Chicago law firm is apparently offering an unpaid law clerk position with the "promise" of a future associate position. Anybody else have a problem with this?


--LinkRemoved--

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby prezidentv8 » Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:36 pm

However, we believe the likely guarantee of an associates position to be much more valuable than the $10-12 x hour the position could pay now.


the likely guarantee


the likely guarantee


:?

User avatar
greenchair
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat May 08, 2010 1:04 am

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby greenchair » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:00 am

Moreover, if you've asked yourself once "why would I work for free?" while reading this ad - we won't fit well together


The heading of the paragraph immediate preceding:
Why are you asking me to work for free?


So if I read the previous paragraph before reaching this paragraph, I am automatically not fit for the job.

???

???
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:15 pm

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby ??? » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:30 am

Nothing would prevent us from compensating the law clerk once the law clerk begins to generate revenue for the firm.


This part really grinds my gears. Not only do the lawyers of this firm not want to pay their law clerk, but they want that 2L law clerk to generate revenue for the firm. Yikes.

User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby cinephile » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:36 am

This isn't so unusual. I know TONS of people in this situation. The idea of actually paying the solo for the privilege of working is new, but this goes on every day.

???
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 8:15 pm

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby ??? » Sat Feb 02, 2013 12:44 am

This isn't so unusual. I know TONS of people in this situation. The idea of actually paying the solo for the privilege of working is new, but this goes on every day.


Excluding people getting school credit for their work? And in light of the fact that it's directly against the ABA rules?

User avatar
cinephile
Posts: 3469
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:50 pm

Re: As Bad as the CT Lawyer?

Postby cinephile » Sat Feb 02, 2013 1:14 am

??? wrote:
This isn't so unusual. I know TONS of people in this situation. The idea of actually paying the solo for the privilege of working is new, but this goes on every day.


Excluding people getting school credit for their work? And in light of the fact that it's directly against the ABA rules?


Yes, of course. People are desperate. If you take an unpaid job with a solo, you're doing it hoping he'll hire you one day and pay you. All sorts of things like "paying your dues" and that shit. People go against the ABA rules all the time.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.