Receiving a rejection letter dated before your interview Forum

[thesealocust]

We cross our bridges when we come to them, and leave them burning behind us - with nothing to show for our progress except the smell of smoke in our nostrils and the presumption that once, our eyes watered.

wut>? sending an email declining an interview b/c of the way this situation materialized =/= burning a bridge. it would amount to burning a bridge if the OP cannot politely do it.

i absolutely agree w/ the italics ...burning bridges is a bad thing from a career/networking/life standpoint.

...pointing out other people's mistakes is intrinsically impolite.

Also it's a quote from a play about Hamlet, because TLS needs to be more like Tumbler and less like a sounding board for law students and their law studenty world views.

[Anonymous User]

To clarify, I did actually go on the interview. Don't want to get specific about how I got it in the first place though. I'm not planning on saying anything about it to anyone.

-this is OP

[Jsa725]

.

[thesealocust]

this. i agree wholeheartedly...do not point out their mistakes... you simply state that you were disappointed how the situation materialized and that you wish to decline the interview. that will get the point across without pointing fingers.

The interview already happened. I think you misread and thought that the rejection came before the interview, which would certainly be more egregious and potentially require action.

[Jsa725]

.

[Pokemon]

Use it as an inspiration to one day make it as a partner at a firm. Then hope that the firm that rejected you faces economic troubles and moves to merge with your firm. Accept their talk, go through some of the procedures, lead them on (verbally only, you do not want a lawsuit), and then send them a pre-dated letter telling them you are not interested.

[TooOld4This]

The letter was postmarked after the interview.

Of course the rejection was written before the interview. It's a form letter. Someone plugged in the wrong date, or changed the address from a rejection sent a couple days earlier and didn't change the date.

The idea that the date on the letter shows a lack of consideration is bordering on absurd. It shows sloppiness. If it had been sent before the interview, then yes, then there would be an issue.

[Anonymous User]

The letter was postmarked after the interview.

Of course the rejection was written before the interview. It's a form letter. Someone plugged in the wrong date, or changed the address from a rejection sent a couple days earlier and didn't change the date.

The idea that the date on the letter shows a lack of consideration is bordering on absurd. It shows sloppiness. If it had been sent before the interview, then yes, then there would be an issue.

Possibly. Or they already knew they were gonna hire someone else before I even walked in the door. Why is that absurd?

-this is OP

[Anonymous User]

My dad is the hiring partner for his office. Anytime he is given an applicant's resume by the HR person, the resume is accompanied by a rejection letter so he can quickly sign it. But if he likes the person, he throws out the rejection letter and the person gets an interview. Here, it was probably something similar where everyone who was given an interview already had a rejection letter prepared for them... Then the interviewers would have pulled the people they liked out of the rejection pile and everyone else would have gotten the rejection letters. It's just unfortunate that somebody messed up and made the date too early.

[TooOld4This]

The letter was postmarked after the interview.

Of course the rejection was written before the interview. It's a form letter. Someone plugged in the wrong date, or changed the address from a rejection sent a couple days earlier and didn't change the date.

The idea that the date on the letter shows a lack of consideration is bordering on absurd. It shows sloppiness. If it had been sent before the interview, then yes, then there would be an issue.

Possibly. Or they already knew they were gonna hire someone else before I even walked in the door. Why is that absurd?

-this is OP

Because they didn't send the letter until the day after you interviewed. If they cared about appearances that much, they would have made sure the date was right. More likely is the scenario described above, where rejection letters are readied as a matter of course (a first interview is usually a 50/50 shot at a job in a best case scenario) and mailed after the interviewer makes the decision. Or the letter was written the day it was mailed and the date wasn't changed from another letter or was simply entered incorrectly. Since the letter wasn't actually mailed until after you interviewed, you don't have much to go on to believe that you had zero chance. And even if that were the case, it is almost never a bad thing to get a chance to sit down and talk to someone in the field when you are looking for a job.

Sorry you didn't get the job, though!

[Anonymous User]

I wrote earlier in support of OP writing a polite, well written letter to the firm.

It is disgusting how students are twisting themselves into pretzels to find excuses for this firm. Even if it's a clerical error, so what? How many students has this firm dinged because of a clerical error on their resume or cover letter? We are expected to be perfect, but got forbid they should fuck up and we should point out, especially since OP has ZERO to lose.

In one of the biglaw threads, objection described the attitude of some associates as Stockholm syndrome. I disagred then, but now wonder if it isn't applicable to some students here.

[presh]

I wrote earlier in support of OP writing a polite, well written letter to the firm.

It is disgusting how students are twisting themselves into pretzels to find excuses for this firm. Even if it's a clerical error, so what? How many students has this firm dinged because of a clerical error on their resume or cover letter? We are expected to be perfect, but got forbid they should fuck up and we should point out, especially since OP has ZERO to lose.

In one of the biglaw threads, objection described the attitude of some associates as Stockholm syndrome. I disagred then, but now wonder if it isn't applicable to some students here.

It's not a pretzel twist. A clerical error in a form letter is VERY COMMON in actual practice. How do I know that? Because I'm an actual practicing attorney, not a law student. I'm also not a biglaw attorney, so I have no motivation to make excuses for them.

It is also possible that they never seriously considered the OP. And? Calling them out on it doesn't help him any.

OP can certainly point it out to the firm. But he has nothing to gain from this because neither the firm nor his school is going to give a shit. Best/most likely case scenario - nothing happens. Worst case scenario - he gets a reputation for being "difficult to deal with."

[TooOld4This]

Also not a student. Dates are a very common error on form letters.

Yes, it is bad form to screw up the date. But jumping to the conclusion that the screw up was something more than a clerical error is an assumption without any other corroboration. Pointing it out does nothing but make the OP look bad. So what if the OP's original assumption is correct? It is still better for a student to have the chance to met with the interviewer than to have the interview cancelled at the last minute (which I'm sure students here would equally complain about). S/he had a chance to make a good impression. That may pay off later. It may not. But a cancelled interview has 0% chance of being valuable down the line.

[iconoclasttt]

Also not a student. And I echo what presh said.

[TTRansfer]

Nuke the fuckers. Turn their office into a parking lot.

[Grond]

We cross our bridges when we come to them, and leave them burning behind us - with nothing to show for our progress except the smell of smoke in our nostrils and the presumption that once, our eyes watered.

wut>? sending an email declining an interview b/c of the way this situation materialized =/= burning a bridge. it would amount to burning a bridge if the OP cannot politely do it.

i absolutely agree w/ the italics ...burning bridges is a bad thing from a career/networking/life standpoint.

...pointing out other people's mistakes is intrinsically impolite.

Also it's a quote from a play about Hamlet, because TLS needs to be more like Tumbler and less like a sounding board for law students and their law studenty world views.

To be fair, both of those guys are dead.

[dixiecupdrinking]

I wrote earlier in support of OP writing a polite, well written letter to the firm.

It is disgusting how students are twisting themselves into pretzels to find excuses for this firm. Even if it's a clerical error, so what? How many students has this firm dinged because of a clerical error on their resume or cover letter? We are expected to be perfect, but got forbid they should fuck up and we should point out, especially since OP has ZERO to lose.

In one of the biglaw threads, objection described the attitude of some associates as Stockholm syndrome. I disagred then, but now wonder if it isn't applicable to some students here.

First, what possible reason could you have for being anonymous?

Second, the reason for this — "We are expected to be perfect, but got forbid they should fuck up and we should point out" — is that they have the job and you want it. That's really all there is to it. It's not making excuses, it's just reality.

You'll need to take perceived slights a lot less personally. This rejection letter situation is a lot of things — sloppy, vaguely insulting — but it is definitely not personal.

[cinephile]

I can completely believe that a firm decided to reject you before you even interviewed. I had a situation sort of like that. They told me up front at the beginning of the callback that they wanted someone who could clerk for them during the school year in addition to the summer, so they would probably be going with someone who attended law school in city X, which I did not. I was stunned that they brought me all the way out and took up my weekend with travel when they knew they weren't going to select me. So it's not really a surprise that a firm decided against you before the interview.

[r6_philly]

I have been in situations where an offer to interview was made when there were positions available, but the open positions closed before the interview took place. Perhaps they do not want to cancel my interview on short notice (I mean they are paying for everything anyway) and they can still establish a file/report on me anyway for future considerations. I did not receive a pre-dated letter, but I was made aware that getting an offer was pretty much an impossibility on the day of the interview.

[dood]

I mean seriously, what the fuck. Can anyone explain this?

Was the rejection letter mailed out before your interview, or is it possibly just a typo? (if the latter, stop)

Was it written by the interviewer or by someone else?

If by someone else:
I'd call the interviewer up and ask for a moment of his/her time. Then explain about the rejection letter and that said person obviously wasted the interviewer's time and you apologize for the inconvenience.

If by the interviewer:
I'd call the interviewer up and ask him/her if s/he likes having his/her time wasted. Then say "neither do I"

edited for clarity

That advice isn't bad, but getting rejection letters dated prior to an interview is actually a fairly common occurrence in the legal profession, even if it's tragicomic and unprofessional on the part of the firm. You hear stories about it every year, so it's probably not worth getting up in arms about.

yeah i second this. i mean i got an email asking me to do a callback and it was addressed "Dear [insert candidate's name here]" - people make typos.

[Anonymous User]

Sorry, but I work at a firm, got a friend an interview, WHILST talking to HR about getting the friend an interview, they said, "oh we don't hire from TT" but we'll interview.

[Anonymous User]

This stuff happens all the time, get over it. The day before I went on an interview, I received a rejection letter from the same firm. I didn't get bent out of shape, I just went on the interview. These mistakes happen. Hell, I've had typos on my cover letters that I discovered after I mailed them. Did the firm call me out on my mistake? No, they just rejected me.

By pointing out this mistake, you are just demonstrating how sensitive and "butt hurt" you can get over the small things. True, you have nothing to lose with respect to this firm, but guess what, partners and associates will talk to attorneys at other firms. You can bet that they will laugh and point out how worked up you got over a freaking date. They will probably talk about how they dodged a bullet when they didn't hire you and urge firms to watch out about you. Look at it from their perspective - if someone is getting worked up about the date on their letter (whether or not it indicates that they rejected you before the interview), then that person will be a pain in the ass when they get assigned a late project, get delayed in potential advancement, or get a freaking paper cut on a client file.

[Anonymous User]

I don't think you mentioned how you got the interview or what size of firm this is, so this anecdote may not be helpful, but this happened to me when I was a 2L and the firm ended up being the one I summered at (and later went to full-time).

I hadn't gotten an interview via the OCI lottery so e-mailed a resume to the general recruiting address. I also stopped by the firm's OCI suite and talked to someone in recruiting. About a week later, I sent my resume to this person and she scheduled a screening interview for me. The day before the screening interview, I got a rejection letter. I went in for the interview anyway and it turned into a callback, which turned into an offer, etc. In my case, the rejection letter was dated a few days before I even discussed the interview scheduling with the recruiter so it was clear that there was a disconnect. I didn't hold it against them and still ended up going to the firm (it was the best fit among my callbacks)... and, really, it's not that surprising that I got two different responses after applying in two different ways within a week of each other (and I didn't take it personally that a resume e-mailed to the general recruiting address was rejected because the firm hires almost all of its summers via OCI). Anyway, I never mentioned it and they either never noticed they had technically rejected me before interviewing me or I already had an offer by the time they realized it.

So, I generally side with thesealocust in saying there is probably little to no benefit of pointing out an error in a situation like this, but at least some small chance that doing so will screw yourself over. My letter easily could have been dated a few days later (ie. after the interview was scheduled), so I'm glad I wasn't tempted to jump to any conclusions about whether they had wasted my time.

[Lwoods]

My dad is the hiring partner for his office. Anytime he is given an applicant's resume by the HR person, the resume is accompanied by a rejection letter so he can quickly sign it. But if he likes the person, he throws out the rejection letter and the person gets an interview. Here, it was probably something similar where everyone who was given an interview already had a rejection letter prepared for them... Then the interviewers would have pulled the people they liked out of the rejection pile and everyone else would have gotten the rejection letters. It's just unfortunate that somebody messed up and made the date too early.

I suspect this is most likely scenario. The recruiting assistant probably prepared the form rejection the night before (trying to get ahead on work), but forgot to change the default date on the letter, the date the letter is printed (Word autofill).

Most attorneys aren't typing these letters. While I suppose one could argue that legal secretaries at firms should be held to the same "perfection" standard that law student applicants are (after all, they write things that clients see, too), they're just not most of the time.

Sorry about the rejection, OP. The legal hiring process can be such a roller coaster.

[Anonymous User]

OP here: I also received a rejection email last week. It was from my HR contact and specifically made reference to the people who interviewed with me.