Law Firm's Cancelling Forum

[landshoes]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

[Anonymous User]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I wouldn't argue, but this forum is not very important to think about grammar..

[A. Nony Mouse]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.

[mjb447]

If 'unprofessional' is basically a synonym for 'impolite,' the things that happened in this story were, and law firm hiring often is, unprofessional.

As Nony suggests, we don't know if the law firm's behavior even qualifies as impolite. If the anon sent four emails over two or three days, I don't think it crosses any sort of professional or social line for the law firm to wait for its hiring situation to settle before responding. If the anon was, say, inquiring once a week and getting no response, then I agree that the firm was rude.

Fair point; I was giving anon the benefit of that doubt/omission. (I also assumed that the anon initially responded quickly to set up an interview, such that it's at least a little unusual to then get a vague 'we'll get back to you,' rather than at a later point when it's more likely that hiring would have progressed further.)

[Npret]

Interesting - I have the opposite reaction. OP asked a question. The normal thing to do would be for the partner to say, "No, we don't reimburse." Not to essentially say "OMG what an entitled person how dare you even bring up the idea that you might be reimbursed for travelling out to me when a phone call would have sufficed, I'm going to light your resume on fire now." If that's the reaction to a simple question, IMO you dodged a bullet.

I don't think that was the reaction. I think the reaction might have been that this guy isn't that interested in the job.They already said they don't do phone interviews. If you can't afford the gas and it's such an effort to drive all that way, you don't seem interested in the job.
Why ask before the interview? They could be thinking that you will say no, you wont come if not reimbursed. If you are willing to go either way, then wait until after the interview and ask if it feels right. I still think asking for $30!is strange from a working professional. I can understand better if it was the $400 plane ticket to know the policy in advance.

[HonestAdvice]

They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

It could also be they would have canceled anyway. I've had this happen before just for a phone interview. Law firms tend to assess their needs like a child goes grocery shopping. If a 6-year old skips lunch, and goes grocery shopping, they will buy too much food and throw most of it out. If they just ate, they'll not have enough food and be hungry again the next day. My guess is when they read your resume, they were busy and between then and now they became slow. Using our analogy with the 6-year old, you caught them before they bit into the first kit kat bar. They've since eaten 2000 calories worth of kit kats, and are on the toilet with a tummy ache. If you wait a few weeks, they'll be hungry again. You can't apply normal business sense to law firms, because this implies they have business sense.

[Npret]

They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

It could also be they would have canceled anyway. I've had this happen before just for a phone interview. Law firms tend to assess their needs like a child goes grocery shopping. If a 6-year old skips lunch, and goes grocery shopping, they will buy too much food and throw most of it out. If they just ate, they'll not have enough food and be hungry again the next day. My guess is when they read your resume, they were busy and between then and now they became slow. Using our analogy with the 6-year old, you caught them before they bit into the first kit kat bar. They've since eaten 2000 calories worth of kit kats, and are on the toilet with a tummy ache. If you wait a few weeks, they'll be hungry again. You can't apply normal business sense to law firms, because this implies they have business sense.

OP as a working professional should be able to buy his own gas. It's not a good look.

[Lettow]

They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

Depending on location, the average clerk can earn more than the average small firm junior associate.

[JusticeJackson]

.

[Anonymous User]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.

It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

[landshoes]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.

It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

accidental anon, this was me

[YBF-W]

Interesting - I have the opposite reaction. OP asked a question. The normal thing to do would be for the partner to say, "No, we don't reimburse." Not to essentially say "OMG what an entitled person how dare you even bring up the idea that you might be reimbursed for travelling out to me when a phone call would have sufficed, I'm going to light your resume on fire now." If that's the reaction to a simple question, IMO you dodged a bullet.

I don't think that was the reaction. I think the reaction might have been that this guy isn't that interested in the job.They already said they don't do phone interviews. If you can't afford the gas and it's such an effort to drive all that way, you don't seem interested in the job.
Why ask before the interview? They could be thinking that you will say no, you wont come if not reimbursed. If you are willing to go either way, then wait until after the interview and ask if it feels right. I still think asking for $30!is strange from a working professional. I can understand better if it was the $400 plane ticket to know the policy in advance.

B/c i'm seriously doubting the ask for reimbursement is unusual in this day and age, even for older folks.. Is there a chance the way you asked for reimbursement came off as entitled?

I.e "since I'm going to be gracing you with my presence, it's fair for you to reimburse for my troubles. If you don't, I regret I won't be able to make it" (yes, extreme). Versus, "I'm excited about this opportunity. Is there a chance the firm is able to provide financial assistance towards my travel? I'd very much appreciate it."

I also don't think it's unfair to suggesting something as seemingly minor such as poor grammar could have made them rethink

[Anonymous User]

They might have had an issue with your grammar.

I mean, that's a little unkind. And yeah, it sounds like the firm dropped the ball in that particular instance. Unfortunately applying for jobs is shitty, for all involved.

It's more unkind not to tell someone about a basic error when they're applying for jobs. There's nothing to be embarrassed about. Hell, I only know one language. But blowing smoke up OP's ass about how much the firm must suck is not really helpful. And I'm not just ragging on the dude's postings, I'm talking about the email he sent to potential employers. This phrasing is really awkward:

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

[rpupkin]

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

[landshoes]

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

[rpupkin]

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.

[RaceJudicata]

lol sock puppetting much? At least you are confident in your grammar advice.

[landshoes]

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.

the first one is me, and I think a thread needs more than one of something to be "full of " that something. but you do you

[mjb447]

To this native TLSer, this commenting style seems very off.

[rpupkin]

To this native TLSer, this commenting style seems very off.

+1

[landshoes]

oh, TLS. never change. <3

[RaceJudicata]

OP here. I went back to look at the emails and the exact quote is "would it be possible if the firm can reimburse traveling expenses?" So I guess somewhere between your two examples.

OP, to a native speaker, this phrasing seems very off. It makes perfect sense, but if you're applying for a job in litigation, they're probably looking for someone who writes at a very high level. Given that, this email might be why they did not ask you for an interview. You might want to run your emails by a native speaker (or another native speaker) first, so that you can catch these kinds of errors and make a good first impression.

+1

This thread is full of brave, anonymous grammar critics.

that was actually me, I'm happy to stand by my post. in a job-search context I'd rather have someone tell me about a mistake than let me keep making it but YMMV

There are multiple anons here. They're *both* you--i.e., you decided to "+1" your own post? Okay then.

the first one is me, and I think a thread needs more than one of something to be "full of " that something. but you do you

To a native speaker, your post seems very off. It's strange to add an extra space before a quotation mark.

[elendinel]

They knew OP was clerking, and clerks don't make much money. It's not an unreasonable request. It may be something related to the tone, or the focus on it being 8 hours from home. i think the I'm a poor clerk angle will garner more empathy than the it's a pain in the ass to get to you angle.

Depending on location, the average clerk can earn more than the average small firm junior associate.

And is likely making a lot more than the average 2L/3L who may also be looking for a job at the firm.

This is hilarious.

[kalvano]

Man, there are a lot of snowflakes in this thread that are in for one hell of a rude awakening when they actually find a job.

[ookoshi]

In a forum that is littered with posts about how mistake free resumes, cover letters, and e-mails are critically important during the interview process, my first thought is that the awkward grammar in the request combined with the tackiness some people will perceive in asking for $30 in gas money might have made them reconsider.

I don't consider the OP's request to be a big deal, but I don't get to make hiring decisions, so my opinion means squat.