Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

(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
neskerdoo
Posts: 599
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:13 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby neskerdoo » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:30 pm

OperaSoprano wrote:
I admire Dean Treanor's courage. Fordham was always the underdog of NYC, and now my school is standing up for itself.





hmmmm....

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby rondemarino » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:30 pm

Since everyone keeps citing NLJ 250 placement, does anyone know how stable that list was over the last 4-5 years. It seemed like everyone was merging with everyone, at least in CA.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby D. H2Oman » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:31 pm

Am I the only one that thinks that this is a lose-lose situation. Reed Smith looks really bad here, but I think Fordham also did themselves a disservice.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby danquayle » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:34 pm

Dwaterman86 wrote:Am I the only one that thinks that this is a lose-lose situation. Reed Smith looks really bad here, but I think Fordham also did themselves a disservice.


I agree. I think this one of those things that looks great in the abstract, but ends up poorly in action. Like if everybody hates a teacher, all the students will cheer if somebody socks that teacher. But nobody, NOBODY, wants to be the student who does it.

I'm not saying Fordham is wrong in the abstract, I just wouldn't be particularly happy if I were a Fordham student. I have a feeling 1Ls and 2Ls are a lot less happy about this than OLs.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby danquayle » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:35 pm

My feelings, summarized:

[Marcellus is telling Butch to take a dive]
Marsellus: The night of the fight, you may feel a slight sting. That's pride fucking with you. Fuck pride. Pride only hurts, it never helps.

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby rondemarino » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:35 pm

thesealocust wrote:
OperaSoprano wrote:Historically, we've placed top third out to 40%.


And while my opinion is not worth anything, I'm not among the 'top 5% LR at yaal only!' doomsayer crowd, my guess is it will dip back to top-third-ish this year but be able to recover with the economy.

I also think this email is a bit of a tempest in a teapot whichever side you are on. Law students / lawyers just love to gossip and judge :mrgreen:


LOL. I think a more effective course of action would have been for schools to band together and come up with a certain standard regarding legal employers (better notice, hiring intentions w.r.t summer class, etc...). Granted in a lot cases firms don't know what they plan to do until about when they do it, but you'd surprised how many firms are pulling crap like this because they know they can get away with it ITE.

Meh. I guess there is no real solution in this situation. Getting crapped on by law firms even before you start working for them seems to be the new trend.

User avatar
thesealocust
Posts: 8442
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 8:50 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby thesealocust » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:38 pm

edit: n/m
Last edited by thesealocust on Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
teaadntoast
Posts: 252
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 3:31 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby teaadntoast » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:40 pm

rondemarino wrote: LOL. I think a more effective course of action would have been for schools to band together and come up with a certain standard regarding legal employers (better notice, hiring intentions w.r.t summer class, etc...).


Agreed.

Then again, I'm not entirely sure how schools would have gone about that for this season, since no one was really sure at the beginning of the year how firms were going to react. I'm also not sure how you'd balance the competing interests of schools with very different class sizes and overall placement rates.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby danquayle » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:44 pm

teaadntoast wrote:
rondemarino wrote: LOL. I think a more effective course of action would have been for schools to band together and come up with a certain standard regarding legal employers (better notice, hiring intentions w.r.t summer class, etc...).


Agreed.

Then again, I'm not entirely sure how schools would have gone about that for this season, since no one was really sure at the beginning of the year how firms were going to react. I'm also not sure how you'd balance the competing interests of schools with very different class sizes and overall placement rates.


I agree. That is the only recourse law schools have. The supply is just far too great for the demand, otherwise.

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby rondemarino » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:46 pm

thesealocust wrote:
rondemarino wrote:Since everyone keeps citing NLJ 250 placement, does anyone know how stable that list was over the last 4-5 years. It seemed like everyone was merging with everyone, at least in CA.


Interesting point. That would mean older NLJ 250 placement data would likely hurt CA schools more than more recent NLJ 250 placement data, no?


Yup. Notice that EVERY California school places well below its respective peers (in 2006)

Stanford v. Columbia, Chicago, Harvard
Boalt v. Michigan, Virginia, Penn
UCLA/USC v. Georgetown, Texas, Cornell (although people may quibble about this)

User avatar
rondemarino
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue Jun 09, 2009 12:29 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby rondemarino » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:49 pm

teaadntoast wrote:
rondemarino wrote: LOL. I think a more effective course of action would have been for schools to band together and come up with a certain standard regarding legal employers (better notice, hiring intentions w.r.t summer class, etc...).


Agreed.

Then again, I'm not entirely sure how schools would have gone about that for this season, since no one was really sure at the beginning of the year how firms were going to react. I'm also not sure how you'd balance the competing interests of schools with very different class sizes and overall placement rates.


You probably don't need this. Just a stronger mechanism (stronger than ATL) for shaming employers might suffice.

Maybe a central database run by law schools for students get the skinny on employers before OCI? I'd sure like to know which other employers to avoid besides Fish & Richardson.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:51 pm

Off topic: I just noticed this anonymous post feature. Is this something new?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:52 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Off topic: I just noticed this anonymous post feature. Is this something new?


As of yesterday.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273137
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:52 pm

dont answer your own questions

06072010
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:30 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby 06072010 » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:53 pm

Using the anonymous feature to post things "off topic" will get this feature removed for you. Be forewarned.

User avatar
Cavalier
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Cavalier » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:53 pm

Wow, OK, I just noticed this was on a new forum. The feature is a great idea.

- The first Anonymous User

06072010
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:30 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby 06072010 » Wed Aug 12, 2009 3:58 pm

I think this is a retarded move by Fordham. Is what Reed Smith did shitty? I don't know. It depends when they knew, I suppose. But Reed Smith is going to do what's best for the firm, and who cares about the fallout to law schools. Would I be personally upset -- maybe, but why waste an interview on students they're not going to hire in this economy. It's a buyer's market.

What Fordham doesn't want to do is make beef with employers right now and that's exactly what they've done. Reed Smith, nor any other firm, needs Fordham. They'll all go somewhere else. News flash: there are a lot of law schools. Even intimating that any firm needs any one law school is simply retarded. If you really believe this, you really -- REALLY -- need a reality check.

And even if they don't come to OCI, Fordham grads could probably still apply. So all they've done is made is getting an interview with Reed Smith a pain in the ass for Fordham students. Good job, Dean assface.

User avatar
MrOrange
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 5:54 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby MrOrange » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:02 pm

PKSebben wrote:I think this is a retarded move by Fordham. Is what Reed Smith did shitty? I don't know. It depends when they knew, I suppose. But Reed Smith is going to do what's best for the firm, and who cares about the fallout to law schools. Would I be personally upset -- maybe, but why waste an interview on students they're not going to hire in this economy. It's a buyer's market.

What Fordham doesn't want to do is make beef with employers right now and that's exactly what they've done. Reed Smith, nor any other firm, needs Fordham. They'll all go somewhere else. News flash: there are a lot of law schools. Even intimating that any firm needs any one law school is simply retarded. If you really believe this, you really -- REALLY -- need a reality check.

And even if they don't come to OCI, Fordham grads could probably still apply. So all they've done is make it a pain in the ass for Fordham students. Good job, Dean assface.

/thread.

User avatar
OperaSoprano
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 1:54 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby OperaSoprano » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:23 pm

MrOrange wrote:
PKSebben wrote:I think this is a retarded move by Fordham. Is what Reed Smith did shitty? I don't know. It depends when they knew, I suppose. But Reed Smith is going to do what's best for the firm, and who cares about the fallout to law schools. Would I be personally upset -- maybe, but why waste an interview on students they're not going to hire in this economy. It's a buyer's market.

What Fordham doesn't want to do is make beef with employers right now and that's exactly what they've done. Reed Smith, nor any other firm, needs Fordham. They'll all go somewhere else. News flash: there are a lot of law schools. Even intimating that any firm needs any one law school is simply retarded. If you really believe this, you really -- REALLY -- need a reality check.

And even if they don't come to OCI, Fordham grads could probably still apply. So all they've done is make it a pain in the ass for Fordham students. Good job, Dean assface.

/thread.


83.2% of ATL readers disagree, apparently. My opinions have been noted already.

06072010
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 2:30 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby 06072010 » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:26 pm

OperaSoprano wrote:
MrOrange wrote:
PKSebben wrote:I think this is a retarded move by Fordham. Is what Reed Smith did shitty? I don't know. It depends when they knew, I suppose. But Reed Smith is going to do what's best for the firm, and who cares about the fallout to law schools. Would I be personally upset -- maybe, but why waste an interview on students they're not going to hire in this economy. It's a buyer's market.

What Fordham doesn't want to do is make beef with employers right now and that's exactly what they've done. Reed Smith, nor any other firm, needs Fordham. They'll all go somewhere else. News flash: there are a lot of law schools. Even intimating that any firm needs any one law school is simply retarded. If you really believe this, you really -- REALLY -- need a reality check.

And even if they don't come to OCI, Fordham grads could probably still apply. So all they've done is make it a pain in the ass for Fordham students. Good job, Dean assface.

/thread.


83.2% of ATL readers disagree, apparently. My opinions have been noted already.


83.2% of ATL readers also think Kash has a nice asslobster. So, take that for what it's worth.

User avatar
philip.platt
Posts: 84
Joined: Thu Jun 18, 2009 9:43 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby philip.platt » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:27 pm

rondemarino wrote:After garbage like this (LinkRemoved), I applaud Dean Treanor for lighting a firecracker up Reed Smith's ass.


thats awesome

Bankhead
Posts: 1124
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:50 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Bankhead » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:30 pm

I agree with PK. In this economy, Fordham should be BEGGING firms to come. If not this year, then come back the next.

I don't care how many ATL readers agree or not.

User avatar
danquayle
Posts: 1108
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 2:12 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby danquayle » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:37 pm

nitsudrx wrote:I agree with PK. In this economy, Fordham should be BEGGING firms to come. If not this year, then come back the next.

I don't care how many ATL readers agree or not.


I think ATL readers feel that way because most of them are either pre-law or early in law school. It's ludicrous for me that an 0L would call a law firm that pays 6 figures 'trash.' Tell me that 3 years from now when you're scrapping to get a job with the Albany Public Defender's office.

Seriously, if you're looking for a job your 3L year, do you really think you're going to give a law firm that pays 6 figures the cold shoulder just because they were rude 3 years ago?

And Mr. O was right, Pk closed the thread.

User avatar
gobucks101
Posts: 1408
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:43 am

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby gobucks101 » Wed Aug 12, 2009 4:45 pm

Responses should go like this...
Person not going to Fordham: Nice! Way to go Fordham!
Person going to Fordham: What the hell? Ego won't make me get off this ramen noodle diet and pay my rent!

Hitachi
Posts: 114
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 4:38 pm

Re: Fordham Makes Reed Smith Pay a Price!

Postby Hitachi » Wed Aug 12, 2009 7:03 pm

rondemarino wrote:
thesealocust wrote:
rondemarino wrote:Since everyone keeps citing NLJ 250 placement, does anyone know how stable that list was over the last 4-5 years. It seemed like everyone was merging with everyone, at least in CA.


Interesting point. That would mean older NLJ 250 placement data would likely hurt CA schools more than more recent NLJ 250 placement data, no?


Yup. Notice that EVERY California school places well below its respective peers (in 2006)

Stanford v. Columbia, Chicago, Harvard
Boalt v. Michigan, Virginia, Penn
UCLA/USC v. Georgetown, Texas, Cornell (although people may quibble about this)

I am guessing that this has more to do with the fact that it's self-reported data, and almost every New York office reported, while most CA offices (being smaller) did not.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.