Top Law Schools

Why do employers care so much if your school was in the same region as the firm? Aside from reasons of self selection of students why does Fordham place better in NYC than GW? Why would a NY employer favor Cornell grads over Georgetown grads (unless he was a Cornell grad himself)? Surely employers are familiar with the quality of these schools and know the educational quality is the same, so why should they care where the school is located?

There may be an obvious answer to this question but it's been bugging me so I'm curious as to what people say. The only thing I can think of is that employers know that if you went to school in that state you probably wouldn't mind living there and thus an in state applicant is mroe likely to accept th job if they get it than an out of state applicant. Maybe they think the out of state applicant is applying to that market as a safety...

acdisagod wrote:The only thing I can think of is that employers know that if you went to school in that state you probably wouldn't mind living there and thus an in state applicant is mroe likely to accept th job if they get it than an out of state applicant.

This is somewhat correct. Moreover, an employer wants to make sure that he/she is hiring an associate who wants to remain in the area long-term. A firm does not want to spend countless dollars and years training an associate who will move to another firm (or another job sector entirely) when the chance comes up.

You can also make much better connections in the area while you're in school if you actually go to school there.

Also, prior years' self-selection helps as far as alumni base goes. A lot of hiring will be done by those very partial or loyal to their original school, and thus job opportunities may be more plentiful. Look at Emory, for example, which seems to have only two markets: New York and Atlanta. I'd have to assume the now-huge NYC contingent from Emory helps/leads new Emory grads get jobs there, and thus the cycle strengthens itself.