Law Firm's Cancelling

(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.
User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby landshoes » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:06 pm

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

Anonymous User
Posts: 299533
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:12 pm

landshoes wrote:They might have had an issue with your grammar.


I wouldn't argue, but this forum is not very important to think about grammar..

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 28029
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:14 pm

landshoes wrote:They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1199
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby mjb447 » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:18 pm

rpupkin wrote:
mjb447 wrote:If 'unprofessional' is basically a synonym for 'impolite,' the things that happened in this story were, and law firm hiring often is, unprofessional.

As Nony suggests, we don't know if the law firm's behavior even qualifies as impolite. If the anon sent four emails over two or three days, I don't think it crosses any sort of professional or social line for the law firm to wait for its hiring situation to settle before responding. If the anon was, say, inquiring once a week and getting no response, then I agree that the firm was rude.

Fair point; I was giving anon the benefit of that doubt/omission. (I also assumed that the anon initially responded quickly to set up an interview, such that it's at least a little unusual to then get a vague 'we'll get back to you,' rather than at a later point when it's more likely that hiring would have progressed further.)

Npret
Posts: 1163
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Npret » Tue Mar 14, 2017 3:31 pm

gregfootball2001 wrote:Interesting - I have the opposite reaction. OP asked a question. The normal thing to do would be for the partner to say, "No, we don't reimburse." Not to essentially say "OMG what an entitled person how dare you even bring up the idea that you might be reimbursed for travelling out to me when a phone call would have sufficed, I'm going to light your resume on fire now." If that's the reaction to a simple question, IMO you dodged a bullet.

I don't think that was the reaction. I think the reaction might have been that this guy isn't that interested in the job.They already said they don't do phone interviews. If you can't afford the gas and it's such an effort to drive all that way, you don't seem interested in the job.
Why ask before the interview? They could be thinking that you will say no, you wont come if not reimbursed. If you are willing to go either way, then wait until after the interview and ask if it feels right. I still think asking for $30!is strange from a working professional. I can understand better if it was the $400 plane ticket to know the policy in advance.

HonestAdvice
Posts: 396
Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 12:33 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby HonestAdvice » Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:11 pm

They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

It could also be they would have canceled anyway. I've had this happen before just for a phone interview. Law firms tend to assess their needs like a child goes grocery shopping. If a 6-year old skips lunch, and goes grocery shopping, they will buy too much food and throw most of it out. If they just ate, they'll not have enough food and be hungry again the next day. My guess is when they read your resume, they were busy and between then and now they became slow. Using our analogy with the 6-year old, you caught them before they bit into the first kit kat bar. They've since eaten 2000 calories worth of kit kats, and are on the toilet with a tummy ache. If you wait a few weeks, they'll be hungry again. You can't apply normal business sense to law firms, because this implies they have business sense.

Npret
Posts: 1163
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Npret » Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:43 pm

HonestAdvice wrote:They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

It could also be they would have canceled anyway. I've had this happen before just for a phone interview. Law firms tend to assess their needs like a child goes grocery shopping. If a 6-year old skips lunch, and goes grocery shopping, they will buy too much food and throw most of it out. If they just ate, they'll not have enough food and be hungry again the next day. My guess is when they read your resume, they were busy and between then and now they became slow. Using our analogy with the 6-year old, you caught them before they bit into the first kit kat bar. They've since eaten 2000 calories worth of kit kats, and are on the toilet with a tummy ache. If you wait a few weeks, they'll be hungry again. You can't apply normal business sense to law firms, because this implies they have business sense.

OP as a working professional should be able to buy his own gas. It's not a good look.

Lettow
Posts: 75
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 12:51 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Lettow » Tue Mar 14, 2017 4:59 pm

HonestAdvice wrote:They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.


Depending on location, the average clerk can earn more than the average small firm junior associate.

JusticeJackson
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 12:26 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby JusticeJackson » Tue Mar 14, 2017 6:41 pm

.
Last edited by JusticeJackson on Tue Mar 21, 2017 10:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 299533
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:04 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
landshoes wrote:They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.


It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby landshoes » Tue Mar 14, 2017 7:04 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
landshoes wrote:They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.


It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


accidental anon, this was me

YBF-W
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2016 3:06 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby YBF-W » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:06 pm

Npret wrote:
gregfootball2001 wrote:Interesting - I have the opposite reaction. OP asked a question. The normal thing to do would be for the partner to say, "No, we don't reimburse." Not to essentially say "OMG what an entitled person how dare you even bring up the idea that you might be reimbursed for travelling out to me when a phone call would have sufficed, I'm going to light your resume on fire now." If that's the reaction to a simple question, IMO you dodged a bullet.

I don't think that was the reaction. I think the reaction might have been that this guy isn't that interested in the job.They already said they don't do phone interviews. If you can't afford the gas and it's such an effort to drive all that way, you don't seem interested in the job.
Why ask before the interview? They could be thinking that you will say no, you wont come if not reimbursed. If you are willing to go either way, then wait until after the interview and ask if it feels right. I still think asking for $30!is strange from a working professional. I can understand better if it was the $400 plane ticket to know the policy in advance.


B/c i'm seriously doubting the ask for reimbursement is unusual in this day and age, even for older folks.. Is there a chance the way you asked for reimbursement came off as entitled?

I.e "since I'm going to be gracing you with my presence, it's fair for you to reimburse for my troubles. If you don't, I regret I won't be able to make it" (yes, extreme). Versus, "I'm excited about this opportunity. Is there a chance the firm is able to provide financial assistance towards my travel? I'd very much appreciate it."

I also don't think it's unfair to suggesting something as seemingly minor such as poor grammar could have made them rethink

Anonymous User
Posts: 299533
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:30 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
landshoes wrote:They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.


It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 5434
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby rpupkin » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby landshoes » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:38 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.


that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 5434
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby rpupkin » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:48 pm

landshoes wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.


that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.

RaceJudicata
Posts: 1583
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby RaceJudicata » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:53 pm

lol sock puppetting much? At least you are confident in your grammar advice.

User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby landshoes » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:53 pm

rpupkin wrote:
landshoes wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.


that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.


the first one is me, and I think a thread needs more than one of something to be "full of " that something. but you do you

User avatar
mjb447
Posts: 1199
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby mjb447 » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:54 pm

To this native TLSer, this commenting style seems very off.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 5434
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby rpupkin » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:55 pm

mjb447 wrote:To this native TLSer, this commenting style seems very off.

+1

User avatar
landshoes
is that cool?
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby landshoes » Tue Mar 14, 2017 8:56 pm

oh, TLS. never change. <3

RaceJudicata
Posts: 1583
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2015 2:51 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby RaceJudicata » Tue Mar 14, 2017 9:25 pm

landshoes wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
landshoes wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.


OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.


+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.


that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.


the first one is me, and I think a thread needs more than one of something to be "full of " that something. but you do you


To a native speaker, your post seems very off. It's strange to add an extra space before a quotation mark.

User avatar
elendinel
Posts: 934
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:29 pm

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby elendinel » Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:03 am

Lettow wrote:
HonestAdvice wrote:They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.


Depending on location, the average clerk can earn more than the average small firm junior associate.


And is likely making a lot more than the average 2L/3L who may also be looking for a job at the firm.

This is hilarious.

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 12000
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby kalvano » Wed Mar 15, 2017 9:16 am

Man, there are a lot of snowflakes in this thread that are in for one hell of a rude awakening when they actually find a job.

ookoshi
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:30 am

Re: Law Firm's Cancelling

Postby ookoshi » Thu Mar 16, 2017 4:08 pm

In a forum that is littered with posts about how mistake free resumes, cover letters, and e-mails are critically important during the interview process, my first thought is that the awkward grammar in the request combined with the tackiness some people will perceive in asking for $30 in gas money might have made them reconsider.

I don't consider the OP's request to be a big deal, but I don't get to make hiring decisions, so my opinion means squat.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.