OCI/callbacks/etc Men's Clothing Mega-thread Forum

[fats provolone]

probably not a partner track SA though

[GOATlawman]

Brooks bros semi annual sale. Any good discounts on work clothes that arent hideous boomer trash? (e.g. their suits)

Shirts look like it's still the standard 3/$189

[BVest]

Brooks bros semi annual sale. Any good discounts on work clothes that aren't hideous boomer trash? (e.g. their suits)

Shirts look like it's still the standard 3/$189

Is it actually going on already? It's usually after Christmas. The only suits I see on sale on the website are clearance.

[GOATlawman]

Brooks bros semi annual sale. Any good discounts on work clothes that aren't hideous boomer trash? (e.g. their suits)

Shirts look like it's still the standard 3/$189

Is it actually going on already? It's usually after Christmas. The only suits I see on sale on the website are clearance.

Oops you're right, just got the shit in the mail for it

Starts 12/26

[BmoreOrLess]

For video interviews should i keep the top button on my suit buttoned? Seems like it looks more professional and since I won't be sitting down/getting up it shouldn't look awkward.

[sprezz]

yeah, probably. if you sit down, unbutton the thing all the way, but if you're just standing the whole time just leave it the way you'd leave it if you were walking around (buttoned top if 2, buttoned middle and optional top if 3).

[AReasonableMan]

yeah, probably. if you sit down, unbutton the thing all the way, but if you're just standing the whole time just leave it the way you'd leave it if you were walking around (buttoned top if 2, buttoned middle and optional top if 3).

Why would he be standing? If you're Skyping it's conceivable that the other person won't be able to see below your chest. This means that any facial gestures will be more pronounced so stay aware of that.

[BmoreOrLess]

Yea, I'll definitely be sitting. I'm wondering if I should keep it buttoned while sitting in a video interview a la every news anchor of all time. I'm thinking yes since the only reason you unbutton it in real life would be because the act of sitting and standing is awkward with it buttoned, but if i'll just be sitting the whole time it's fine to have it buttoned.

To make it even more awkward, it's not actually a skype interview, there's pre-formed questions they want you to answer via video.

[sprezz]

i misread the first post. leave it unbuttoned when sitting. it's not just the up-down activity; at a basic level, your jacket just isn't tailored to be buttoned when sitting (an actual thing people do, usually for double breasted jackets). not only will you look more like a normal interviewee, but your collar and lapel lines will likely lay cleaner with it unbuttoned than if it was buttoned. so you'll look better too.

[Anonymous User]

1L here. before law school, i had no reason to dress formally and owned only a pair of florsheim tassel loafers (yes, i know). after reading these boards, i purchased a pair of what i thought were bostonian black cap toe oxfords for interviews. they look a bit shiny but fit well and look fine. however, apparently they are bluchers not oxfords, despite being labeled as such. aside from people like pufer, will anyone notice/care? i also have a pair of cole haan burgundy penny loafers for business casual events.

when i wear a blazer and slacks (and a tie), which pair of shoes is better? does it matter if i am wearing grey or tan slacks?

also, i am in what is likely one of the most casual jurisdictions in the country.

ETA link to ""oxfords" http://www.amazon.com/Bostonian-Mens-An ... B000FGC2L4

[sprezz]

you're fine with the bluchers

black laceups and burgundy loafers are opposite ends of formal-casual spectrum. either is doable with dress pants (read: wool) and blazer, though neither is optimal. i'd probly loosely split it as black with darker pants and loafers with cotton/light pants. but you'll be fine

[Anonymous User]

you're fine with the bluchers

black laceups and burgundy loafers are opposite ends of formal-casual spectrum. either is doable with dress pants (read: wool) and blazer, though neither is optimal. i'd probly loosely split it as black with darker pants and loafers with cotton/light pants. but you'll be fine

much appreciated.

[nevdash]

1L here. before law school, i had no reason to dress formally and owned only a pair of florsheim tassel loafers (yes, i know). after reading these boards, i purchased a pair of what i thought were bostonian black cap toe oxfords for interviews. they look a bit shiny but fit well and look fine. however, apparently they are bluchers not oxfords, despite being labeled as such. aside from people like pufer, will anyone notice/care? i also have a pair of cole haan burgundy penny loafers for business casual events.

when i wear a blazer and slacks (and a tie), which pair of shoes is better? does it matter if i am wearing grey or tan slacks?

also, i am in what is likely one of the most casual jurisdictions in the country.

ETA link to ""oxfords" http://www.amazon.com/Bostonian-Mens-An ... B000FGC2L4

Are you asking if buying a pair of true oxfords could possibly benefit you with some interviewers in some way, however rare the interviewer and however small the benefit? If so, the answer is yes. Or are you asking whether you absolutely have to purchase another pair of shoes, lest you get laughed out of every interview? If so, the answer is no. Those shoes aren't that shitty. So I guess whether you should wear those to interviews depends on whether you're willing to spend money to give yourself every little edge during interviews.

[FSK]

1L here. before law school, i had no reason to dress formally and owned only a pair of florsheim tassel loafers (yes, i know). after reading these boards, i purchased a pair of what i thought were bostonian black cap toe oxfords for interviews. they look a bit shiny but fit well and look fine. however, apparently they are bluchers not oxfords, despite being labeled as such. aside from people like pufer, will anyone notice/care? i also have a pair of cole haan burgundy penny loafers for business casual events.

when i wear a blazer and slacks (and a tie), which pair of shoes is better? does it matter if i am wearing grey or tan slacks?

also, i am in what is likely one of the most casual jurisdictions in the country.

ETA link to ""oxfords" http://www.amazon.com/Bostonian-Mens-An ... B000FGC2L4

Are you asking if buying a pair of true oxfords could possibly benefit you with some interviewers in some way, however rare the interviewer and however small the benefit? If so, the answer is yes. Or are you asking whether you absolutely have to purchase another pair of shoes, lest you get laughed out of every interview? If so, the answer is no. Those shoes aren't that shitty. So I guess whether you should wear those to interviews depends on whether you're willing to spend money to give yourself every little edge during interviews.

Those are fine - just make sure they're clean & freshly polished.

[fats provolone]

next oci I'm gonna ding everyone wearing park avenues just to shake things up

[mvp99]

next oci I'm gonna ding everyone wearing park avenues just to shake things up

and white shirts

[FSK]

next oci I'm gonna ding everyone wearing park avenues just to shake things up

Fifth avenue 4 lyfe

[sprezz]

Are you asking if buying a pair of true oxfords could possibly benefit you with some interviewers in some way, however rare the interviewer and however small the benefit? If so, the answer is yes.

no, this is wrong. you're as likely to get dinged for PA's as you are to get dinged for a black captoe blucher. it will not happen. even granting that there is a conceivable situation where it could happen if the right insane person is evaluating your qualifications, the same is true for whatever other shoe you would replace it with because to make that leap you already left the realm of conservative dress enforcement and entered the realm of fucking lunatics.

try to get the decisions "right" when you make them, but this "mistake" has zero impact on the appropriateness of OP's OCI wardrobe.

[nevdash]

Are you asking if buying a pair of true oxfords could possibly benefit you with some interviewers in some way, however rare the interviewer and however small the benefit? If so, the answer is yes.

no, this is wrong. you're as likely to get dinged for PA's as you are to get dinged for a black captoe blucher. it will not happen. even granting that there is a conceivable situation where it could happen if the right insane person is evaluating your qualifications, the same is true for whatever other shoe you would replace it with because to make that leap you already left the realm of conservative dress enforcement and entered the realm of fucking lunatics.

try to get the decisions "right" when you make them, but this "mistake" has zero impact on the appropriateness of OP's OCI wardrobe.

If you read any men's fashion blog or forum, the only discussions you'll find on the subject will say that true oxfords are more appropriate for formal settings than bluchers. It's just not an ongoing debate. Again, I admit that not many people will notice, and if they do notice, they probably won't care that much, but you're totally wrong in thinking that wearing a true oxford could ever hurt you. There's no way that somebody would (1) notice your shoes, and (2) have a preference for bluchers over oxfords in formal settings. If the person is the type to do (1), then he's not going to have the preference in (2).

[sprezz]

this is the practical advice thread; it exists in the specific context that is the hiring process out of law schools. styfo / aaac don't police that context, and the denizens thereof that happen to occupy both contexts have repeatedly stated this level of "mistake" does not impact their hiring decisions. if you can find me an interviewer at OCI that's buttheaded enough to (1)-(2)-(ding), he's probably also got an issue with your collar roll and choice of wristwear so you're fucked anyway. and you're as likely to find this specific person as you are to find one who would turn up their nose at the PA for its well-documented lasting/stitching issues given its price point. or maybe you'll get lucky and find someone who's read antongiovanni etc and would pose a hard counterexample to your flawed assumption...
...but tbf those would be books so that's outside your appeal to authority

once you hit a base level of appropriateness, any more just shifts functionally the same (miniscule) amount of risk among different idiosyncrasies. and tracks your personal preferences. the latter reason is worth upgrading for, but not the former: dudes' clothes discussion on the internet combines with advice from lawyers growing up ITE to create a bizarre hybrid of excessive risk aversion and an enormous consumption bias. people who did fine hitting the base level of appropriateness don't need any more doses of that, but this thread occasionally lays it on too thick

[romothesavior]

I think part of the problem with this discussion is its being framed as a "ding" for wearing the wrong item. That's probably a bit strong. I'm sure nobody is actively dinging people for wearing bluchers instead of oxfords or a green tie instead of burgundy. There's not some dress code litmus test you must meet to get a job. (Though I have heard of people getting dinged for pinstripes, and for the lack of collar stays.)

I am definitely the kind of person who would notice someone's shoes, or their collar type, or their jacket fit. (I notice them all the time in court or depositions, and I definitely make judgments about people based on it.) I don't think I'd be looking to actively ding anyone at OCI for a minor clothing faux pas, but it would definitely make a subconscious impression on me. When you've got a horde of equally qualified, difficult to distinguish law students, seeing someone polished down to the last detail can make a positive impression. And that's what this thread is all about: being polished down to the last detail. Is it likely to change the outcome of OCI? No. But if someone wants to know what the "legal interview uniform" should like like, Pufer nailed it.

Congrats on being the 100th person to derail this thread with the exact same tired argument.

[sprezz]

of course pufer is right but there's play in the joints and that's what subsequent posters here are asking about. you can't derail a thread that only pops up when people ask for advice by disagreeing with advice given. but if you can, i'm #99 too (pale blue shirt fine), and 97 (3 button fine if tailored), and 95 (pleated pants fine). happy to help us get to this point. wear your collar stays.

[PennBull]

ugh there's a simple fucking solution that doesn't require your shitty diatribes

if you already own something that's close enough, it's fine. If you're looking to buy new things for interviews, stick to the guide.

[fats provolone]

i mean then again people fight over which posters name gets to be on the men's fashion thread so lawyers can be quite petty

[kalvano]

Wearing tee shirts and jeans to work makes this whole thread far more enjoyable.