Quick anecdote for small town folks who want NYC/large city Forum

[M458]

Lol. Thanks for the advice. I'm sure you are the star interviewer at your firm. Too bad you can't interview everyone who needs a job. Some people might need to consider an answer to this question in advance.

How difficult is it to understand that people who want jobs will move where the jobs are. I could understand interviewer obsession with ties/compelling reasons to want to be in a city if we lived in a booming legal economy, but it takes some incredibly willful blindness not to recognize that law students are desperate and will gladly transplant wherever the money is.
And there's no indication that the Bumblefuck, Indiana biglaw market is going to be booming any time soon, so I can't imagine why any interviewer would think Johnny Country Boy is going to jump ship for home 6 months after starting as an associate.

The reason they care is two fold.

1) They don't want to waste their time winning and dinning you only to take the Bakers Daniel offer in Indy.

2) A lot of them do jump ship from home 8-18 months later because NYC is a piss and garbage smelling hellhole, and NYC biglaw resembles the warsaw ghetto.

People leaving a NYC biglaw firm because they hate NYC feels infinitely less plausible to me than people leaving a NYC biglaw firm because they hate biglaw. I know you have this personal thing out for NYC b/c of Chicago inferiority complex (and don't get me wrong, I like Chicago) but most law students do not feel the same way about NY that you do.

And 8-18 months is obviously too early for ROI, but given that the entire partner model is predicated on 90% of associates leaving eventually it makes little sense to place so much emphasis on long-term regional ties...especially to NY of all places. How many people leave a firm in their first year anyway? And I ask that honestly, not having seen stats on this.

I think, though, that if you hate big law but live in a place you enjoy and where you have a support system (friends, activities, family) in place, it can make it more palatable and result in you staying at the firm in that city longer.

If someone already hates big law and on top of that feels lonely, hates the people, and just dislikes it generally in NYC, that makes it more likely they'll jet out sooner rather than later. Compare that with someone who may have grown up around New York, has friends/family there, or genuinely likes the city, and though they may hate the big law life, they're not so miserable outside of work living there that they're desperate to get out altogether.

The difference might not manifest itself within the 1st year, but more so between years 3 and 5, where associates become more profitable for firms and the difference in those who can tolerate/enjoy NYC and those who hate it will/could have tangible effects on attrition rate.

[09042014]

The reason they care is two fold.

1) They don't want to waste their time winning and dinning you only to take the Bakers Daniel offer in Indy.

2) A lot of them do jump ship from home 8-18 months later because NYC is a piss and garbage smelling hellhole, and NYC biglaw resembles the warsaw ghetto.

People leaving a NYC biglaw firm because they hate NYC feels infinitely less plausible to me than people leaving a NYC biglaw firm because they hate biglaw. I know you have this personal thing out for NYC b/c of Chicago inferiority complex (and don't get me wrong, I like Chicago) but most law students do not feel the same way about NY that you do.

And 8-18 months is obviously too early for ROI, but given that the entire partner model is predicated on 90% of associates leaving eventually it makes little sense to place so much emphasis on long-term regional ties...especially to NY of all places. How many people leave a firm in their first year anyway? And I ask that honestly, not having seen stats on this.

There are TONS of NYC biglaw refugees who would murder a baby to leave. And I didn't mean to just Chicago. California is a big target. I didn't say most, but plenty of people don't want anything to do with NYC but interview there anyway. I did. I got an offer and then didn't take it.

And it's the people who NYC firms are suspicious of who do it the most. The person who has lived in the midwest, the south, or the west for their entire lives? They could have moved to NYC and never did. And they probably won't like it.

MOST Law Firm attrition among juniors is them quitting. Firm's don't fire 1-5/6 years unless the suck or there isn't work.

IIRC it's about 20% a year attrition.

If you are from the south, went to Cal for UG, and went to Penn, NYC firms won't be suspicious.

But if went to UIUC then worked in Chicago then went to Northwestern? You don't think that looks suspicious?

[rad lulz]

.s

[Pokemon]

I am not sure why there is much dispute about this issue. Biglaw has no problem filling its ranks. As such, they can be picky. One of the things that they can be picky about is likelihood of an associate leaving or not liking it.

The whole talk of what % leaves or the biglaw model is based on associates leaving is irrelevant. They can afford to be picky about this issue and they will be. The question is how to deal with this preference that biglaw might have. NYSprague provides an example of someone dealing well with it. The question is not whether the preference is logical, right or whatever.

Personally, I do not buy the whole "I'm a small town person, so I might not like NYC." NYC does not bite small town people. If you do not like NYC it is probably because you miss friends/family. However there are firms asking about it because they can afford to ask and be selective about it.

[dresden doll]

"Why NYC" is literally the only question I got asked in every single interview until I actually moved there.

Btw, I have no ties to speak of since I didn't even grow up in the States.

[09042014]

"Why NYC" is literally the only question I got asked in every single interview until I actually moved there.

Btw, I have no ties to speak of since I didn't even grow up in the States.

You should have said "Fresh offa da boat" and they would have rained offers on you.

[dresden doll]

"Why NYC" is literally the only question I got asked in every single interview until I actually moved there.

Btw, I have no ties to speak of since I didn't even grow up in the States.

You should have said "Fresh offa da boat" and they would have rained offers on you.

I should have done a whole Borat skit.

[09042014]

"Why NYC" is literally the only question I got asked in every single interview until I actually moved there.

Btw, I have no ties to speak of since I didn't even grow up in the States.

You should have said "Fresh offa da boat" and they would have rained offers on you.

I should have done a whole Borat skit.

Why new york

No Serbians trying to snipe me, of course

[Anonymous User]

I'm from LA and I'm worried about appearing to be a flight risk for NY firms. However, I've never been to NY so I wouldn't be able to give reasons like those in the OP. What about something generic, like you prefer to live in a big city, not have to drive, etc., and you like the lifestyle associated with it (or other such BS) compared to LA?

[09042014]

I'm from LA and I'm worried about appearing to be a flight risk for NY firms. However, I've never been to NY so I wouldn't be able to give reasons like those in the OP. What about something generic, like you prefer to live in a big city, not have to drive, etc., and you like the lifestyle associated with it (or other such BS) compared to LA?

Why not LA instead?

Lie about having family ties.

[Anonymous User]

I'm from LA and I'm worried about appearing to be a flight risk for NY firms. However, I've never been to NY so I wouldn't be able to give reasons like those in the OP. What about something generic, like you prefer to live in a big city, not have to drive, etc., and you like the lifestyle associated with it (or other such BS) compared to LA?

Why not LA instead?

Lie about having family ties.

I prefer LA instead but I don't have all my grades yet and CW seems to be that NY is a good fallback option. I'm at a non-NYC T14.

[bjsesq]

He's from South Dakota. You do NOT want this guy at your firm.

[EIP account]

Right now, the first page of the legal employment forum has one thread by a SA deciding between NYC and a small market and another thread by someone asking how easy it is to lateral from NYC to TX.

I think it's unrealistic to act like NY firms don't need to worry about associates leaving before they'd like. I mean, sure, it's a tough market and many people will move for a job. But associates at NY OCI firms usually have options pretty soon after they start—maybe options that require taking a pay cut, but definitely still options. Given that, I don't think it's at all unreasonable for NY firms to attempt to predict who might take a job with them for a year or two and then be willing to take a pay cut for a job in a different market.

[smallfirmassociate]

"because they can't take the city."
...
"openly miserable people who hate living in New York".

I understand what you are saying and think you have valid concerns, but I'd like to point out that these two are different things. Just because someone doesn't like living in NYC doesn't mean they "can't take" it. It just means they have other options that they consider better. I don't know if you intended that sentence and some of the tone of your post to sound arrogant, but that's how it came across to me, as a small town resident who really, really dislikes New York for completely rational reasons.

I suppose I take exception to the whole assumption that some student with a strong academic record from South Dakota who believes that he wants to be in NYC is going to be significantly less likely to adapt to the city and to biglaw life than a student from Miami or Denver. Not only is a statement like that empirically suspect, it raises the question of why you would even have that thought process or the thought process you would undergo to lend enough weight to such a suspect assumption to possibly affect the way you conducted his interview.

I'll go out on a limb and say the vast majority of biglaw washouts are not from rural towns. Seems you should focus on personality traits and achievements instead of stereotypes.

Also, LOL at "being able to navigate" NYC. Staggering into a cab and muttering a street intersection doesn't take much ability.

[bulinus]

ITT: People shocked that an interview question might be a test of your ability to toe the bullshit accelerator.

[NYSprague]

"because they can't take the city."
...
"openly miserable people who hate living in New York".

I understand what you are saying and think you have valid concerns, but I'd like to point out that these two are different things. Just because someone doesn't like living in NYC doesn't mean they "can't take" it. It just means they have other options that they consider better. I don't know if you intended that sentence and some of the tone of your post to sound arrogant, but that's how it came across to me, as a small town resident who really, really dislikes New York for completely rational reasons.

I suppose I take exception to the whole assumption that some student with a strong academic record from South Dakota who believes that he wants to be in NYC is going to be significantly less likely to adapt to the city and to biglaw life than a student from Miami or Denver. Not only is a statement like that empirically suspect, it raises the question of why you would even have that thought process or the thought process you would undergo to lend enough weight to such a suspect assumption to possibly affect the way you conducted his interview.

I'll go out on a limb and say the vast majority of biglaw washouts are not from rural towns. Seems you should focus on personality traits and achievements instead of stereotypes.

Also, LOL at "being able to navigate" NYC. Staggering into a cab and muttering a street intersection doesn't take much ability.

I'm sure you guys are right. Thanks so much for the interviewing tips.

[Ohiobumpkin]

As somebody who comes from flyover country, I get the anti-NYC/East Coast sentiment and find it irksome when East Coasters think I have cattle in my back yard because of the state that I come from.

However, NYS was simply suggesting that individuals who interview with NYC firms have well rehearsed, positive, and believable answers to a relatively common question in hiring decisions (note, all hiring decisions regardless of industry). If I applied to a job in a neighboring state, I expect to be asked "Why state/city X?" Why should NYC/L.A./Chi-town firms be any less cautious in asking out-of-state applicants why they want to live/work in city X? Because they're diverse, large, have jerbs, and composed of people from all over the country? Employers have a legitimate interest in not hiring individuals who will just bail on them sooner than they would want.

Whether or not NYS was expressing NYC/East Coast parochial elitism, or whether the particular example he initially gave was not good, is irrelevant. These questions get asked by employers, and applicants who are prepared will have a good answer in order to increase the odds they'll receive an offer. Personally, I think he is doing a service to help people from rural backgrounds who use these forums for job seeking tips.

[NYSprague]

He's from South Dakota. You do NOT want this guy at your firm.

Lol. I liked this guy a lot. He got high marks from everyone. That is one reason I thought he was a solid example.

[bjsesq]

He's from South Dakota. You do NOT want this guy at your firm.

Lol. I liked this guy a lot. He got high marks from everyone. That is one reason I thought he was a solid example.

Coming from another South Dakotan: don't say I didn't warn you

[A. Nony Mouse]

"because they can't take the city."
...
"openly miserable people who hate living in New York".

I understand what you are saying and think you have valid concerns, but I'd like to point out that these two are different things. Just because someone doesn't like living in NYC doesn't mean they "can't take" it. It just means they have other options that they consider better. I don't know if you intended that sentence and some of the tone of your post to sound arrogant, but that's how it came across to me, as a small town resident who really, really dislikes New York for completely rational reasons.

I suppose I take exception to the whole assumption that some student with a strong academic record from South Dakota who believes that he wants to be in NYC is going to be significantly less likely to adapt to the city and to biglaw life than a student from Miami or Denver. Not only is a statement like that empirically suspect, it raises the question of why you would even have that thought process or the thought process you would undergo to lend enough weight to such a suspect assumption to possibly affect the way you conducted his interview.

I'll go out on a limb and say the vast majority of biglaw washouts are not from rural towns. Seems you should focus on personality traits and achievements instead of stereotypes.

Also, LOL at "being able to navigate" NYC. Staggering into a cab and muttering a street intersection doesn't take much ability.

I mean, I get the reaction to an implication that small-town = rube, but I don't think NYS was saying he'd only ask this of small-town applicants - that just happened to be his example. I suspect he'd ask the same thing of anyone who didn't appear to have any significant experience in NYC or its environs.

[Anonymous User]

My family is from South Dakota. Everyone wanted to leave. No one ever wanted to go back.

Anon because, well, people know I used to live in SD.

[smallfirmassociate]

I mean, I get the reaction to an implication that small-town = rube, but I don't think NYS was saying he'd only ask this of small-town applicants - that just happened to be his example. I suspect he'd ask the same thing of anyone who didn't appear to have any significant experience in NYC or its environs.

He said some things that led me to believe that he geared the interview approach to this guy because he was rural, not just because he was from a place other than NYC. The OP said:

I pushed him hard on why he wanted New York.
...
You need to realize that I lived in NYC my entire life. I had strong doubts that this person from the middle of nowhere could be happy here.

OP didn't say that he also has strong doubts about whether people from Miami could be happy in NYC, but I made a reasonable inference based on his post that he probably wouldn't. Otherwise he could have framed the post with "I interview people who are not from NYC and ____." It was obviously relevant to OP that this guy was a VERY rural guy and that he was from SD, etc.

I agree with other statements that a smart rural guy who thinks he wants to be in NYC is probably a lower risk than a person from a decent-sized secondary market city. I'd be far more concerned about a dude from, say, Marietta or Oak Park or Overland Park wanting to go back home than a dude from One Horse, Wyoming.*

Also, what if the guy is gay? I'm not saying that based on the theater and cooking things (well, maybe just a litttttle bit). In that case, he might really not want to go back home and he might also really not want to say that in an interview.

*yes I made that town up

[JusticeJackson]

.

[PredatoryWasp]

"How do you think you will cope living in NYC?" is exactly the type of softball question I hope for going into any interview, regardless of the occupation.

I fail to understand why someone giving you an easy question would be taken as insulting anyone. If you are that hypersensitive to parochialism and you are clearly an outsider, you probably authentically aren't a good fit for NYC. All the question is designed to get at is whether or not you have given two seconds of thought to the reality of working at a particular law firm and how that decision affects many other aspects of your life. Is it such a simple question that it boarders on insulting? Sure. Is being asked a simple question necessarily a bad thing? I don't think so. It loosens up the person being interviewed and lets them get on a roll and feel more comfortable. Sometimes it isn't the quality of the question that really matters, it's just getting the candidate's nerves out of the way.

[Tanicius]

Look guys, I think you all make valid points about how it's annoying that New Yorkers look down on those of us who grew up in flyover territory, but come on. A solid 20-second spiel about wanting to live in the area is not hard to do. Hell, I've had success with much tougher parts of the country:

Guy from Miami: "Why do you want down in Miami? It's hot! It's muggy on Christmas. You can handle that for your career?"

Me: "I don't care where I live -- I just want to be a public defender, and we both know your office is one of the best."

That's all it takes most of the time. NYSprague is just telling you, for your own benefit, to have something better than the usual bullshit about enjoying [insert New York attraction].