Paul Hastings no-offer rate Forum

[Anonymous User]

I see that in 2012, Paul Hastings firm wide offer rate was 58 / 70, or 83%. In the NY office, it was 13/16, or 81%. That is especially troubling in NYC where the average offer rate was 98.5% last year.

Is this normal at PH or was this an off year? What were the reasons given? Does anybody know their historic rates?

[Anonymous User]

Their offer rate for the NY office in 2011 was also not 100%.

[Anonymous User]

This year's offer rate (in NY) was back at 100%. They don't look to no-offer people, but if you screw up (normally related to social events, as opposed to work quality) they don't mind not having the 100% rate every year like some firms do. In other words, maintaining a 100% rate is less important than making sure those who come back full time will be people everyone else likes working with. But really, its your offer to lose.

[Anonymous User]

Last summer's offer rate was like 80%, there's no way that many people just screwed up. Something weird happened last summer. I would definitely look elsewhere if you have other options

[Anonymous User]

Last summer's offer rate was like 80%, there's no way that many people just screwed up. Something weird happened last summer. I would definitely look elsewhere if you have other options

3 people (83% offer rate) does not equal "that many people". At a firm with a larger summer class (Paul Weiss for example routinely has 100+) those same three no-offers would correlate to an offer rate of 97+%. Percentages get skewed with smaller class sizes, and I would encourage OP to ask people they've interviewed with/recruiting personnel his exact question head-on ("why were 3 people no-offered last summer?") and judge their responses for him/herself.

[AntipodeanPhil]

3 people (83% offer rate) does not equal "that many people". At a firm with a larger summer class (Paul Weiss for example routinely has 100+) those same three no-offers would correlate to an offer rate of 97+%. Percentages get skewed with smaller class sizes, and I would encourage OP to ask people they've interviewed with/recruiting personnel his exact question head-on ("why were 3 people no-offered last summer?") and judge their responses for him/herself.

12/70 is "that many people."

I would encourage OP not to accept an offer from Paul Hastings if he has an offer from any other firm with a reasonable offer rate.

And he definitely shouldn't trust the recruiting personnel, whatever they say. It's so easy to say the no-offers were for fit, bad behavior, etc, when the truth is otherwise.

[koalatriste]

LOL at the Paul Hastings recruiter posting in this thread...

[Anonymous User]

I turned down my PH post-CB offer for this reason. That plus the bizarre firmwide writing competition (admittedly, I don't know if that still happens) just seemed like far too big a risk when I had other options on the table.

[Anonymous User]

So what are the rumors of what happened to those 3 in the NY office? Aka: what the official story vs what the summers are saying?

[Anonymous User]

Back when I was doing OCI I remember from my research that Paul Hastings generally hovers around an 80-90% offer rate year by year. So I don't think it's anything egregious per se, it's just something that they do.

[Anonymous User]

I turned down my PH post-CB offer for this reason. That plus the bizarre firmwide writing competition (admittedly, I don't know if that still happens) just seemed like far too big a risk when I had other options on the table.

They do still do the writing competition. It was stupid but not really that big a deal. The offer rate is reason enough to turn them down if you have other options though

[Anonymous User]

This year's offer rate (in NY) was back at 100%. They don't look to no-offer people, but if you screw up (normally related to social events, as opposed to work quality) they don't mind not having the 100% rate every year like some firms do. In other words, maintaining a 100% rate is less important than making sure those who come back full time will be people everyone else likes working with. But really, its your offer to lose.

I guess this is impossible to confirm, right?

[Anonymous User]

LOL at the Paul Hastings recruiter posting in this thread...

+1

[Anonymous User]

This year's offer rate (in NY) was back at 100%. They don't look to no-offer people, but if you screw up (normally related to social events, as opposed to work quality) they don't mind not having the 100% rate every year like some firms do. In other words, maintaining a 100% rate is less important than making sure those who come back full time will be people everyone else likes working with. But really, its your offer to lose.

I guess this is impossible to confirm, right?

I was a PH NYC Summer this year and everyone got an offer.

[Anonymous User]

My sense from some conversations is that Paul Hastings is straddling the boundary between a true V-25 and something more second-tier. They clearly aspire to be a true V-25. I think they are very reluctant to lower their billing rates and are very interested in maintaining high PPP. I think this COULD mean they're a little more liberal with the cleaver up and down the totem pole, from summer associate to equity partner. They want to be leveraged, but if the high-billing rate work isn't there, they want to be lean.

The problem is there isn't much room left in the V-25, not in this economy. Keeping billing rates high may not turn out to be such a great idea.

[Anonymous User]

From what I can tell the no offers weren't financially related. But it also wasn't just cases where Summers got drunk at a SA event and called someone a bitch or something crazy like that. The firm will no offer people who they think don't fit in with the culture of the firm. One of the no-offered who I knew fairly well did not do anything insanely wrong, didn't screw up any assignments. They just didn't fit in, didn't go to many events, and didn't make a great impression.

If you have an SA at Paul Hastings that should probably scare you more than it just being temporary financial issues because it means the risk isn't going away. The firm clearly doesn't care about giving 100% offers, and if you aren't liked you are gone.

83% offer rate was a bad year, but the 100%'s this year are probably too good. Rumors are it's typically around 90-95% rate depending on the office. That is significantly higher than many peer firms, though not all V100 give 100%, particularly outside of NYC.

I wouldn't worry too much if generally you make good impressions on co-workers. But still this should be a major factor in choosing an offer. It's definitely more risky than some peer firms. And if you are socially awkward, douchey or have a hard time being friendly, well, I'd pick a different firm every single time.

[Loose Seal]

I don't work at Paul Hastings but as an associate I have seen two summer classes come and go at my firm and here's the thing: Most summer associate work product sucks. Most summers don't really know what they're doing, so while some of the work is usable, and some is actually good, most is kind of crappy. Moreover, many summers can be pretty awkward during the summer program, partially because it can be a little weird to be in effectively a three-month job interview and not everyone handles that situation suavely.

While a firm might certainly be justified in no-offering people for bad work product or bad fit, you want to summer somewhere that will give you credit for the fact that: 1) but for the most egregious of work product issues (failing to turn in multiple assignments, lying about work, being rude to a client) most summers' work product will get better throughout the course of their first years as they learn WTH they are supposed to do; and 2) but for the most egregious of personality issues (sexual harassment, violence, other behavior that clearly makes everyone uncomfortable), people will warm up once they begin working, and at the very least do not deserve to lose a job because they are not "cool" enough.

A firm that is no-offering only in extreme cases will likely not have multiple no-offers for a small class.

[rad lulz]

.

[Anonymous User]

I interviewed at PH during a callback this week, and one of my interviewers mentioned something about the offer rates. I think one of the students before me brought it up to him, and he was surprised that it was so low. Perhaps PH is on notice that students notice now.

[Ludo!]

I don't work at Paul Hastings but as an associate I have seen two summer classes come and go at my firm and here's the thing: Most summer associate work product sucks. Most summers don't really know what they're doing, so while some of the work is usable, and some is actually good, most is kind of crappy. Moreover, many summers can be pretty awkward during the summer program, partially because it can be a little weird to be in effectively a three-month job interview and not everyone handles that situation suavely.

While a firm might certainly be justified in no-offering people for bad work product or bad fit, you want to summer somewhere that will give you credit for the fact that: 1) but for the most egregious of work product issues (failing to turn in multiple assignments, lying about work, being rude to a client) most summers' work product will get better throughout the course of their first years as they learn WTH they are supposed to do; and 2) but for the most egregious of personality issues (sexual harassment, violence, other behavior that clearly makes everyone uncomfortable), people will warm up once they begin working, and at the very least do not deserve to lose a job because they are not "cool" enough.

A firm that is no-offering only in extreme cases will likely not have multiple no-offers for a small class.

Great post, thank you

[hephaestus]

They clearly aspire to be a true V-25. I think they are very reluctant to lower their billing rates and are very interested in maintaining high PPP. I think this COULD mean they're a little more liberal with the cleaver up and down the totem pole, from summer associate to equity partner. They want to be leveraged, but if the high-billing rate work isn't there, they want to be lean.

The problem is there isn't much room left in the V-25, not in this economy. Keeping billing rates high may not turn out to be such a great idea.

Yeah they don't want to be a lowly V27 like TTT Shearman.

[unc0mm0n1]

I don't work at Paul Hastings but as an associate I have seen two summer classes come and go at my firm and here's the thing: Most summer associate work product sucks. Most summers don't really know what they're doing, so while some of the work is usable, and some is actually good, most is kind of crappy. Moreover, many summers can be pretty awkward during the summer program, partially because it can be a little weird to be in effectively a three-month job interview and not everyone handles that situation suavely.

While a firm might certainly be justified in no-offering people for bad work product or bad fit, you want to summer somewhere that will give you credit for the fact that: 1) but for the most egregious of work product issues (failing to turn in multiple assignments, lying about work, being rude to a client) most summers' work product will get better throughout the course of their first years as they learn WTH they are supposed to do; and 2) but for the most egregious of personality issues (sexual harassment, violence, other behavior that clearly makes everyone uncomfortable), people will warm up once they begin working, and at the very least do not deserve to lose a job because they are not "cool" enough.

A firm that is no-offering only in extreme cases will likely not have multiple no-offers for a small class.

Great post, thank you