No-offer due to grades Forum

[BaiAilian2013]

believe me, I know of many people being no offered for grades from many firms

I want to believe you. Name the firms please.

This. Either name the firms, or post non-anonymously so we can see if you're someone worth paying attention to.

I'll second f0bolous, this sounds like MrAnon: pessimistic and backed by vague and unsubstantiated hearsay, and seemingly without actual knowledge of how legal hiring works.

Thirded, it really does.

[kaiser]

You guys are all way too sanguine about this. No offers for bad 2L grades happens all the time in the v100 (and believe me, I know of many people being no offered for grades from many firms) And I'm not talking major drops either. If you were top 10% and you fall to top 25%, I'd be very worried. These firms have tons of eager law grads knocking down the door for jobs and can be afford to be very, very selective. They are also making a huge investment in you - so why invest in someone whose 1L grades were a fluke or were too lazy to keep it up 2L year?

Moral of the story - if your grades drop at all really, I'd be worried. Obviously a 10% drop is not going to be as bad as a 25% or 50% drop but really any drop is something to take very seriously.

Can a mod please show who posted this?

[Younger Abstention]

This issue is not a serious concern. Unless you're working for Munger or some other geeky firm.

[dailygrind]

You guys are all way too sanguine about this. No offers for bad 2L grades happens all the time in the v100 (and believe me, I know of many people being no offered for grades from many firms) And I'm not talking major drops either. If you were top 10% and you fall to top 25%, I'd be very worried. These firms have tons of eager law grads knocking down the door for jobs and can be afford to be very, very selective. They are also making a huge investment in you - so why invest in someone whose 1L grades were a fluke or were too lazy to keep it up 2L year?

Moral of the story - if your grades drop at all really, I'd be worried. Obviously a 10% drop is not going to be as bad as a 25% or 50% drop but really any drop is something to take very seriously.

Can a mod please show who posted this?

It's not who you think it is, and no. The poster's opinion may be too broad an extrapolation from a small set of data. It may well just be wrong. But unless there's dick behavior or abuse of anon to voice controversial opinions, if there's some sensitive information in there it takes something fairly egregious for me to out someone.

[romothesavior]

Good to hear, because I think I am uber-screwed this semester.

[dailygrind]

Good to hear, because I think I am uber-screwed this semester.

I think I am only going to be saved by the fact that a lot of my classmates put in almost no effort. This semester still looks like it will feature a big drop, though. Not feeling too good about that.

[bjsesq]

You guys are all way too sanguine about this. No offers for bad 2L grades happens all the time in the v100 (and believe me, I know of many people being no offered for grades from many firms) And I'm not talking major drops either. If you were top 10% and you fall to top 25%, I'd be very worried. These firms have tons of eager law grads knocking down the door for jobs and can be afford to be very, very selective. They are also making a huge investment in you - so why invest in someone whose 1L grades were a fluke or were too lazy to keep it up 2L year?

Moral of the story - if your grades drop at all really, I'd be worried. Obviously a 10% drop is not going to be as bad as a 25% or 50% drop but really any drop is something to take very seriously.

Can a mod please show who posted this?

It's not who you think it is, and no. The poster's opinion may be too broad an extrapolation from a small set of data. It may well just be wrong. But unless there's dick behavior or abuse of anon to voice controversial opinions, if there's some sensitive information in there it takes something fairly egregious for me to out someone.

I love you to death, man, but this is fucking stupid. There isn't a single goddamn thing it said that puts this person at risk. At all. You are encouraging this nonsense.

[Anonymous User]

I worked at a V100 firm widely "known" to no-offer for grades. Being risk-averse, I straight-up asked what it would take for me to lose my offer. As of my summer, I was within top third of my class at a T14.

I was told, bluntly, that I would have to finish at or near the bottom of my class from here on out to lose my offer. A part of that, I think, is that I produced quality work during the summer, which I firmly believe is 90% of what they look for. But the overarching point was that I would have to completely and utterly phone it in before I was even considered for termination. This hasn't made me want to work harder, but it has put me more at ease.

Whoever above is saying "I know lots of people getting no-offered," I think, isn't giving a full picture. At some schools, there might be 5 people no-offered, but several of those might be your own friends; it's easy to extrapolate. There might be one "high profile" example, which makes people think no one is immune. I will say, at my T14, I don't know a single person no-offered. I don't think that number is indicative, I just think it's another data point - making a conclusion from that one point would be silly.

[Anonymous User]

Let's consider the economics of the risk-averse firm, trying to recruit exceptional talent. Summer associates are obviously paid at a much higher rate than a summer associate actually earns for the firm. Firms are essentially handing out money because it is, as we all know, a 12-week job interview.

Firms initially try to attract top talent by offering money on par with first year associates. Firms also understand that students are risk-averse and will most likely summer at the ones reflecting high offer rates. After all, considering the stigma attached to no-offered summers, a summer associate would well advised to select the firm which the chance for receiving an offer. Importantly, the mechanics here are that firms have a huge incentive to offer permanent positions to nearly every student because attracting future talent depends upon a high offer rate. Consequently, firms must be exacting about the sort of things that will cause them to no-offer. Poor work product is almost exclusively it because this is the best snap shot into whether a student will make a bad employee.

The rub of it is, is that firms can't no offer students who fell out of the top ten to the quarter as that poster implied because A) there's too much risk involved in taking a student who didn't summer there and thus, has provided no insight into their work product and B) there's too much incentive to offer all students versus no offering on small changes to GPA (a non-work related item).

[c3pO4]

Let's consider the economics of the risk-averse firm, trying to recruit exceptional talent. Summer associates are obviously paid at a much higher rate than a summer associate actually earns for the firm. Firms are essentially handing out money because it is, as we all know, a 12-week job interview.

Firms initially try to attract top talent by offering money on par with first year associates. Firms also understand that students are risk-averse and will most likely summer at the ones reflecting high offer rates. After all, considering the stigma attached to no-offered summers, a summer associate would well advised to select the firm which the chance for receiving an offer. Importantly, the mechanics here are that firms have a huge incentive to offer permanent positions to nearly every student because attracting future talent depends upon a high offer rate. Consequently, firms must be exacting about the sort of things that will cause them to no-offer. Poor work product is almost exclusively it because this is the best snap shot into whether a student will make a bad employee.

The rub of it is, is that firms can't no offer students who fell out of the top ten to the quarter as that poster implied because A) there's too much risk involved in taking a student who didn't summer there and thus, has provided no insight into their work product and B) there's too much incentive to offer all students versus no offering on small changes to GPA (a non-work related item).

Last two posts are CR.

Get strait C's and D's, and we have a problem. Get mostly B's and a few C's and a few A's, and we're fine.

Edit: Just kick ass in the summer.

[romothesavior]

I love you to death, man, but this is fucking stupid. There isn't a single goddamn thing it said that puts this person at risk. At all. You are encouraging this nonsense.

+1. I know anon abuse isn't a huge deal, but when people are allowed to post stupid shit that contains no sensitive information behind the wall of anonymity, it does detract from the overall discussion in the legal employment forums.

[dailygrind]

I love you to death, man, but this is fucking stupid. There isn't a single goddamn thing it said that puts this person at risk. At all. You are encouraging this nonsense.

+1. I know anon abuse isn't a huge deal, but when people are allowed to post stupid shit that contains no sensitive information behind the wall of anonymity, it does detract from the overall discussion in the legal employment forums.

I'll give future iterations more thought.

ETA: any significant changes would likely occur after winter break rolls around. Gotta concentrate on not failing out of lawl school for now.

[bjsesq]

I love you to death, man, but this is fucking stupid. There isn't a single goddamn thing it said that puts this person at risk. At all. You are encouraging this nonsense.

+1. I know anon abuse isn't a huge deal, but when people are allowed to post stupid shit that contains no sensitive information behind the wall of anonymity, it does detract from the overall discussion in the legal employment forums.

I'll give future iterations more thought.

Love you.

[Anonymous User]

Let's consider the economics of the risk-averse firm, trying to recruit exceptional talent. Summer associates are obviously paid at a much higher rate than a summer associate actually earns for the firm. Firms are essentially handing out money because it is, as we all know, a 12-week job interview.

Firms initially try to attract top talent by offering money on par with first year associates. Firms also understand that students are risk-averse and will most likely summer at the ones reflecting high offer rates. After all, considering the stigma attached to no-offered summers, a summer associate would well advised to select the firm which the chance for receiving an offer. Importantly, the mechanics here are that firms have a huge incentive to offer permanent positions to nearly every student because attracting future talent depends upon a high offer rate. Consequently, firms must be exacting about the sort of things that will cause them to no-offer. Poor work product is almost exclusively it because this is the best snap shot into whether a student will make a bad employee.

The rub of it is, is that firms can't no offer students who fell out of the top ten to the quarter as that poster implied because A) there's too much risk involved in taking a student who didn't summer there and thus, has provided no insight into their work product and B) there's too much incentive to offer all students versus no offering on small changes to GPA (a non-work related item).

Last two posts are CR.

Get strait C's and D's, and we have a problem. Get mostly B's and a few C's and a few A's, and we're fine.

Edit: Just kick ass in the summer.

Does this change depending on whether one goes to a T14 or a T40?

[Snape]

Just look at offer rates across the board....once you get an SA and represent yourself....just pass your class and you are fine....there is NO evidence as to the contrary....

[Anonymous User]

The 100% offer rates are highly dubious, it's weird that students take these firms for their word when there's plenty of way's to game this "assessment" but don't take law schools at their word.

There are plenty of ways to "offer" a student while letting them know they are not welcome back. Not sure why the rates are taken at their word.

[Morgan12Oak]

lol exactly. I know for a fact 2 firms with "100% offer rates" on NALP weren't actually 100%. But, don't bother I've tried this conversation before the TLS community is convinced they have their lottery tickets punched. I think it's funny how a community who always talks about how suspect law school employment numbers are so readily believe NALP numbers. Sharks will be sheep.

[Gigaton Punch]

lol exactly. I know for a fact 2 firms with "100% offer rates" on NALP weren't actually 100%. But, don't bother I've tried this conversation before the TLS community is convinced they have their lottery tickets punched. I think it's funny how a community who always talks about how suspect law school employment numbers are so readily believe NALP numbers. Sharks will be sheep.

and what two firms are those? (you can PM if you don't want to reveal).

[BruceWayne]

I love you to death, man, but this is fucking stupid. There isn't a single goddamn thing it said that puts this person at risk. At all. You are encouraging this nonsense.

+1. I know anon abuse isn't a huge deal, but when people are allowed to post stupid shit that contains no sensitive information behind the wall of anonymity, it does detract from the overall discussion in the legal employment forums.

This thinking is immature as hell. I know that this is hard for a lot of people on here to fathom, but you not agreeing with something that someone says does not equate with that comment being "stupid". Although that is a common line of thinking on here it's very arrogant, juvenile, and idiotic.

Further, after actually going to law school and not just hearing comments about it from people who have 7000 TLS points after 6 months, I've found that a lot of stuff said on here is exaggerated out of the ass. The 100 percent offer thing and the difficulty of summer associate work might be one of the most exaggerated.

I definitely know people who were no offered and not because they "tried" to get no offered by doing things like getting drunk in the office. Frankly, these firms have some pretty high standards for work product quality. They also fully expect you to know how to use Westlaw/Lexis in a manner that absolutely minimizes costs. The thing about both of those things is that law school doesn't teach you a damn thing about how to do them. Further, firms often want assignments to be completed in a very short time frame without any sort of errors. It's not damn show up for a summer and get an offer like people make it out to be. Considering what I've learned about that and other things people on here make out to be a lot easier/simple than they really are, I sure as hell wouldn't start saying that "no one" gets no offered for grades.

[keg411]

lol exactly. I know for a fact 2 firms with "100% offer rates" on NALP weren't actually 100%. But, don't bother I've tried this conversation before the TLS community is convinced they have their lottery tickets punched. I think it's funny how a community who always talks about how suspect law school employment numbers are so readily believe NALP numbers. Sharks will be sheep.

and what two firms are those? (you can PM if you don't want to reveal).

+1. I believe it, I just want to know.

[Anonymous User]

They also fully expect you to know how to use Westlaw/Lexis in a manner that absolutely minimizes costs.

Don't most firms have flat rates? Just avoid the $s.

Further, firms often want assignments to be completed in a very short time frame without any sort of errors....Considering what I've learned about that and other things people on here make out to be a lot easier/simple than they really are, I sure as hell wouldn't start saying that "no one" gets no offered for grades.

What do either of these have to do with grades?

[Anonymous User]

Listing the two firms and the evidence would be very helpful. Without listing the firms, how can anyone adjust bidding or accepting offers accordingly? Because TLS relies largely on ancedotal evidence, and because all ancedontal evidence in the area of no-offer due to grades, or no offer more generally, points toward it being very unlikely, then in order to rebut this wisdom why not provide contrary ancedotal evidence?

[existenz]

This issue is not a serious concern. Unless you're working for Munger or some other geeky firm.

That's one firm I could definitely see doing it. "Oh, you are no longer CoA caliber? GTFO."

[Anonymous User]

Good, because classmates at my T2 are only studying harder, bringing up the curve while I sit on my ass playing Mass Effect 3!