You've Been Warned Forum

[Anonymous User]

Agree with IAFG, I think everyone (including ATL) may be giving the hiring partner and the firm too much credit. What exactly do we think was so great about the other potential summers at this firm? Sounds like this might be just the type of hustler they could use. Everyone in this thread acts like it was sent to Martin Lipton.

[Anonymous User]

The questions about the commute and pay weren't unreasonable (although wordy). But you want to split a summer, just ask to split the summer - don't dress it up as an opportunity for the "salesman" in you to try to score the firm another client.

Perhaps, but partners aren't always on the same page within a firm. For all we know, some other partner or attorney at the firm signaled that question number three would be precisely the kind of thing the firm appreciated. [Fill in details conveyed during the interview process about how Bus Dev is the lifeblood of the firm, and superstar Partner X at the firm started bringing clients in as a summer associate]. Not necessarily defending the kid, but there is a chance that unknown mitigating details exist in this situation.

I split my 2L summer with a market-paying lit boutique. The hiring partner was the point of contact for all details. Even though they had a yearly summer program, the quality of communication couldn't compare to the communication from my big firm.

[IAFG]

did the dude receive an offer letter, or do shitlaw firms not mention salary info in their offer letters?

also:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014 ... n-strategy

He knew what his summer pay would be but not his starting salary. My full time salary wasn't in my summer offer letter.

[ChardPennington]

Agree with IAFG, I think everyone (including ATL) may be giving the hiring partner and the firm too much credit. What exactly do we think was so great about the other potential summers at this firm? Sounds like this might be just the type of hustler they could use. Everyone in this thread acts like it was sent to Martin Lipton.

Dood for everyone except the top 5% or so at a school like BYU a $70K or so insurance defense gig at a 15-person law firm is a pretty sweet deal.

[ChardPennington]

did the dude receive an offer letter, or do shitlaw firms not mention salary info in their offer letters?

also:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014 ... n-strategy

He knew what his summer pay would be but not his starting salary. My full time salary wasn't in my summer offer letter.

I think most firms pay summers the same as first years though so it should be easy enough to figure out.

[IAFG]

did the dude receive an offer letter, or do shitlaw firms not mention salary info in their offer letters?

also:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014 ... n-strategy

He knew what his summer pay would be but not his starting salary. My full time salary wasn't in my summer offer letter.

I think most firms pay summers the same as first years though so it should be easy enough to figure out.

Shitlaw tho? The only person I know who worked in ID made a different rate than he would have made post-bar passage.

[Dignan]

Agree with IAFG, I think everyone (including ATL) may be giving the hiring partner and the firm too much credit. What exactly do we think was so great about the other potential summers at this firm? Sounds like this might be just the type of hustler they could use. Everyone in this thread acts like it was sent to Martin Lipton.

Dood for everyone except the top 5% or so at a school like BYU a $70K or so insurance defense gig at a 15-person law firm is a pretty sweet deal.

The big law firms do, but I've heard of several small firms that do not. These firms tend to call their summer hires "clerks" instead of "summer associates," and the pay will often be in the $15 - $20 per hour range.

By the way, I have more sympathy for this guy than many ITT. His third question was inappropriate and suggested a naive exuberance that could have created headaches for the firm, but it seems like the partner could have addressed the situation through a phone call that explained why the student's plan was inappropriate. Yeah, the firm was well within its rights to withdraw its offer, and I totally I understand why they did it, but they're the ones who liked him enough to give him an offer after his interview. They could've been a little more patient and flexible.

[ChardPennington]

did the dude receive an offer letter, or do shitlaw firms not mention salary info in their offer letters?

also:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014 ... n-strategy

He knew what his summer pay would be but not his starting salary. My full time salary wasn't in my summer offer letter.

I think most firms pay summers the same as first years though so it should be easy enough to figure out.

Shitlaw tho? The only person I know who worked in ID made a different rate than he would have made post-bar passage.

Yeah fair point, with an ID shop I think they bill for less or something so it wouldn't surprise me if their compensation was all caddywompus. Don't really know how it works.

[A. Nony Mouse]

By the way, I have more sympathy for this guy than many ITT. His third question was inappropriate and suggested a naive exuberance that could have created headaches for the firm, but it seems like the partner could have addressed the situation through a phone call that explained why the student's plan was inappropriate. Yeah, the firm was well within its rights to withdraw its offer, and I totally I understand why they did it, but they're the ones who liked him enough to give him an offer after his interview. They could've been a little more patient and flexible.

Yeah, I can see that; but in the same way people are saying that maybe someone at the firm suggested that question would be a good one to ask (which of course we don't know), there may have been other things that made the student a borderline candidate for the firm, and this was the last straw. (We don't know that either, but if we're going to speculate about things outside the e-mail exchange, it could go both ways.)

[legalese_retard]

I agree that the third question was weird and raises a flag, but I think revoking the offer was a bit harsh. This kid sounds like he went straight from undergrad to law school, so this was probably his first job offer. We also don't know the context of familiarity between the partner and the law school. If they met for an extensive timeframe, I'm sure the partner told him to email him with any questions or concerns he may have had about the firm or position. But the law student may have only met the partner for only a few minutes. In that case, the partner probably freaked out with the questions and didn't think it was worth the risk to get to know the student better during the summer.

Hopefully the student will get in touch with career services or someone with more experience, so they can better explain the job process. Students get conflicting advice about demonstrating an interest about the firm, asking detailed questions, and trying to show one's ability to drum up business, especially for the smaller firms.

My other concern for the student is the fact that this letter is now out in the open. I'm sure the firm is more than upset that this has been published and I am sure other firms will be hesitant about hiring someone who would expose the internal decisions of a law firm.

[NotMyRealName09]

The fact that this guy thought he could speak on behalf of the firm as a law student speaks to a troublesome lack of judgment and discretion.

How the hell was he going to sell the firm when he didn't even know what his salary would be? He had no knowledge of their billing rates or practices, their distinguishing characteristics, or any other information that a corporate counsel might want to know. He would have been more likely to damage the firm's reputation than actually persuade that company to change their outside counsel.

He got what he deserved.

[PepperJack]

It's not the firm's job to teach some kid how not to be a douche. The first couple of questions weren't that bad but the third is a giant red flag. Why put the firm in a potentially bad position?

I said this on the first page, but you gotta ding these weirdos and aspie freaks early and often. Weirdo's become unreasonable asshole seniors.

This is funny but inconsiderate. It's likely the guy is reading this stuff. It's also sick that above the law makes its living mostly off of making fun of every day human being's life ruining situations. At least Kim Kardashian gets paid a lot, and asks for publicity.

[PepperJack]

did the dude receive an offer letter, or do shitlaw firms not mention salary info in their offer letters?

also:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014 ... n-strategy

He knew what his summer pay would be but not his starting salary. My full time salary wasn't in my summer offer letter.

In the future it is probably best to ask career services before asking. With no info and talking out of my ass, it seems likely it's based on negotiation. That's how I'd do it if I ran a small shop - pay the bare minimum to keep morale high.

[downinDtown]

So an added twist to this incident (from the comment section on ATL: http://abovethelaw.com/2014/03/gunner-f ... questions/).

One detail that wasn't mentioned in this article is that the first two questions the student asked in this post were actually per recommendation of the law school's CSO.

So apparently the CSO vetted/recommended the letter before Mr. Eager Beaver sent it. This seems to be further evidence of every CSOs incompetence and how out-of-touch they are with the realities of the job market/legal hiring. I can only wonder if the CSO contacted the employer after asking for an explanation with their tail between their legs. I mean, I thought the point of CSOs was to help you get a job, not to assist you in acting like an aspie and getting your job offers quashed.

[A. Nony Mouse]

TBF, because the CSO vetted the first 2 questions doesn't mean they vetted the whole letter. The comment seems to suggest the CSO hadn't vetted the third question.

[patogordo]

the first two questions are barely controversial. yea ok maybe better asked of HR but that's a minor faux pas, it's not like he texted it to john quinn in all caps.

[ChardPennington]

the first two questions are barely controversial. yea ok maybe better asked of HR but that's a minor faux pas, it's not like he texted it to john quinn in all caps.

TCR if you're texting Quinn is cock shots or GTFO as I understand it

[IAFG]

the first two questions are barely controversial. yea ok maybe better asked of HR but that's a minor faux pas, it's not like he texted it to john quinn in all caps.

TCR if you're texting Quinn is cock shots or GTFO as I understand it

Also I think all lower-case is actually the protocol.

[patogordo]

the first two questions are barely controversial. yea ok maybe better asked of HR but that's a minor faux pas, it's not like he texted it to john quinn in all caps.

TCR if you're texting Quinn is cock shots or GTFO as I understand it

Also I think all lower-case is actually the protocol.

<--

[encore1101]

I have absolutely no sympathy for this dude. Hopefully he learns his lesson, but my guess is that he'll just claim the firm couldn't handle his initiative and try the same thing for his next job application.

I agree that the email was a bad choice and that the firm probably did the right thing. However, I take issue with the comments to the effect that the student will probably blame the firm for this and not take any responsibility. The problem is that we all know what is wrong with the email, but obviously the student didn't. When the firm summarily revoked his offer, they did not explain exactly why. What is he supposed to learn from that? Don't send the email at all? The email was ok, but don't send it to the partner? Don't talk about commuting? Don't talk about business opportunities? Don't ask about splitting summers? All of the above?

It is like if someone comes to your door and your dog 1) barks, 2) jumps up on the person, and 3) licks their face. If you wait for all three to happen and then just yell and scream at him indiscriminately, how is he supposed to know which action(s) were unacceptable? Of course you know what you want, but you have not clearly communicated that to him objectively. So don't be surprised next time if he barks and jumps on the next visitor because he assumed that it was only item 3 that you were mad about (because it was the last thing he did before you got mad).

This is a great analogy.

This assumes they care about teaching him a lesson.

Sorry this shouldn't have been anonymous - Pepperjack.

On topic, my dogs' names are Pepper and Jack, respectively.

[Anonymous User]

god this makes me cringe on behalf of all lawyers

[smallfirmassociate]

Is it bad that of all the trainwreck debris flying through the air in that email exchange, I yawned while reading all of it until I got to this gem: "the opportunity here is unique and sensitive."

At an insurance defense firm.

El oh el.

Someone needs to make a commercial about this law firm complete with all the cinematography of a tampon commercial. "Come work for us and engage yourself in delicate, sensitive depositions." (Flowing white silk sheets brush gently across an attorney's face as he tries to ask a question in deposition.) "Enjoy this truly unique opportunity." (Persian cat walks gently across a desk covered in discovery, slips on a loose paper and snarls, thuds as it hits the floor.)