Small firm - pay for own flight for interview? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hey everyone, I go to a top 5 school in one part of the country and am applying for civil rights boutique firms mostly in other parts of the country.

One partner contacted me for an interview asking if I was going to be in his firm's city any time soon. I'm guessing the right response to this (since I had no plans to be there soon) is just to say, "Unfortunately I have no plans to travel to X any time soon. However, I'm very excited about the possibility of spending a summer at your firm. Perhaps we could chat over the phone, or videoconference?"

Is that reasonable? Or if I really want to work for this firm am I better of saying, "Why yes, I'm going to be in town next week..." while I purchase my plane ticket in another browser tab?

FWIW I've got another interview with a firm in the same city scheduled for a videoconference interview next week.

[Prairie]

One interview justifies flying back to interview in-person. Two makes it a no-brainer. In my opinion, school is optional this semester as you look for a job. Also, don't worry about the expense. If they ask for receipts, great. If not, also great. You have a chance at a job, which is what it is all about.

[Anonymous User]

FWIW, I did an interview with a well regarded mid-size firm while I was in town over the summer. They contacted me at the beginning of OGI about doing more interviews but said that if I were not going to be in town already that they would be happy to do it by videoconference. I decided to let them know that I was interested enough to fly out on my own to do it in person if they were interested. They said yes, and I flew out. They mentioned they were impressed that I flew out, and I got an offer. I also was able to set up several interviews while I was in town, and it was easier to get those interviews because I already had the one.

[anon168]

Hey everyone, I go to a top 5 school in one part of the country and am applying for civil rights boutique firms mostly in other parts of the country.

One partner contacted me for an interview asking if I was going to be in his firm's city any time soon. I'm guessing the right response to this (since I had no plans to be there soon) is just to say, "Unfortunately I have no plans to travel to X any time soon. However, I'm very excited about the possibility of spending a summer at your firm. Perhaps we could chat over the phone, or videoconference?"

Is that reasonable? Or if I really want to work for this firm am I better of saying, "Why yes, I'm going to be in town next week..." while I purchase my plane ticket in another browser tab?

FWIW I've got another interview with a firm in the same city scheduled for a videoconference interview next week.

Are you really that fucking brain-dead? Or has the Meth afterburn not worn off yet?

[thesealocust]

One interview justifies flying back to interview in-person. Two makes it a no-brainer. In my opinion, school is optional this semester as you look for a job. Also, don't worry about the expense. If they ask for receipts, great. If not, also great. You have a chance at a job, which is what it is all about.

I disagree with this. A firm that isn't interested enough in a candidate to cover interview costs also isn't a firm that is especially likely to hire the candidate either.

It's not wrong to fly out for an interview on your own dime, but I don't think it's a smart strategy to adopt for the average job hunter.

Basically interviews are great, but I doubt worth hundreds of dollars each.

[TTH]

One interview justifies flying back to interview in-person. Two makes it a no-brainer. In my opinion, school is optional this semester as you look for a job. Also, don't worry about the expense. If they ask for receipts, great. If not, also great. You have a chance at a job, which is what it is all about.

I disagree with this. A firm that isn't interested enough in a candidate to cover interview costs also isn't a firm that is especially likely to hire the candidate either.

It's not wrong to fly out for an interview on your own dime, but I don't think it's a smart strategy to adopt for the average job hunter.

Basically interviews are great, but I doubt worth hundreds of dollars each.

TITCR.

You may check with your school's career services to see if they offer any travel reimbursement. We're able to get reimbursed for up to $100 from the school for job-seeking travel expenses. It's a drop in the bucket, but if you're going to do it anyway, then why not?

[Anonymous User]

It might not be an issue of not caring about you; some firms just don't have the budgets to cover interview costs so usually only hire local candidates, and they find plenty of qualified local candidates to fill their jobs. If they give you a chance to interview, and its a job you want (or need), the expected value of the job (career salary * probably of landing the job) when you have no other prospects is much higher than the cost of your plane ticket.

[badaboom61]

It might not be an issue of not caring about you; some firms just don't have the budgets to cover interview costs so usually only hire local candidates, and they find plenty of qualified local candidates to fill their jobs. If they give you a chance to interview, and its a job you want (or need), the expected value of the job (career salary * probably of landing the job) when you have no other prospects is much higher than the cost of your plane ticket.

Sorry didn't mean to be anon.

[dingbat]

Hey everyone, I go to a top 5 school in one part of the country and am applying for civil rights boutique firms mostly in other parts of the country.

How's Chicago?

[Anonymous User]

Hi everyone, OP here.

Agreed that if working for one of these firms were my a-numero-uno aspiration it would mostly likely be worth it to schedule my flight and follow up with the other firms I've applied to in this market.

However I'm sort of torn as I love legal services and am thinking I might prefer to do legal services this summer and commit more fully to that as a career path. Yes, I know, how lucrative. Anyway the legal services org's I'd apply to don't start hiring for another month or so.

So I suppose I just need to do some soul searching and figure out which of these things I actually want to do next summer (and probably for several years out of law school).

As for this...

How's Chicago?

The answer is, remarkably prestigious!

[cinephile]

I did this for a small firm callback in my hometown. Then during the interview they told me they'd really prefer someone who is also going to the local law school so that their summer associate could continue to work as a clerk during 3L. I didn't get it and I could not believe they called me back knowing they didn't want me and telling me to cover my own costs. I wouldn't waste my money again.

[Anonymous User]

I did this for a small firm callback in my hometown. Then during the interview they told me they'd really prefer someone who is also going to the local law school so that their summer associate could continue to work as a clerk during 3L. I didn't get it and I could not believe they called me back knowing they didn't want me and telling me to cover my own costs. I wouldn't waste my money again.

Had a friend go through a similar experience... Pretty sleazy imo.

[TTH]

Hi everyone, OP here.

. . .

As for this...

How's Chicago?

The answer is, remarkably prestigious!

Didn't mention RIGOR. Not really a UChi student.

[thesealocust]

For the firms doing this, it's no cost to them to see if you're so perfect they can't imagine not hiring you. But as a student, you have to realize that these smaller firms can do huge numbers of interviews, even placing a premium on the home town heroes, all to fill a small handful of slots (or even just one!).

[anon168]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

[Anonymous User]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

Entitlement?

Paying $300-$500 to fly across the country for the chance at a job is not fair to place on a student with no income, who is incurring substantial debt. The firm knows what their applicant pool looks like, they have more income than the student, and they can potentially even obtain deductions for these expenses.

Students should not be paying for these types of things. The only reason they do is because the economy is bad enough that students will have a race to the bottom in search of those jobs.

[anon168]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

Entitlement?

Paying $300-$500 to fly across the country for the chance at a job is not fair to place on a student with no income, who is incurring substantial debt. The firm knows what their applicant pool looks like, they have more income than the student, and they can potentially even obtain deductions for these expenses.

Students should not be paying for these types of things. The only reason they do is because the economy is bad enough that students will have a race to the bottom in search of those jobs.

You just proved my point. Thank you.

[paratactical]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

Entitlement?

Paying $300-$500 to fly across the country for the chance at a job is not fair to place on a student with no income, who is incurring substantial debt. The firm knows what their applicant pool looks like, they have more income than the student, and they can potentially even obtain deductions for these expenses.

Students should not be paying for these types of things. The only reason they do is because the economy is bad enough that students will have a race to the bottom in search of those jobs.

You just proved my point. Thank you.

What?

[dingbat]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

Entitlement?

Paying $300-$500 to fly across the country for the chance at a job is not fair to place on a student with no income, who is incurring substantial debt. The firm knows what their applicant pool looks like, they have more income than the student, and they can potentially even obtain deductions for these expenses.

Students should not be paying for these types of things. The only reason they do is because the economy is bad enough that students will have a race to the bottom in search of those jobs.

You just proved my point. Thank you.

What?

that in this economy, a firm doesn't have to pay to fly a mediocre candidate out to see them, rather than just interview locally and/or those who go through the trouble (and effort) to come to them.

Why should a firm have to pay to fly a whole bunch of people across the country?

[paratactical]

that in this economy, a firm doesn't have to pay to fly a mediocre candidate out to see them, rather than just interview locally and/or those who go through the trouble (and effort) to come to them.

Why should a firm have to pay to fly a whole bunch of candidates across the country?

I no one said the firm ought to pay for everyone; only that the interviewee shouldn't have to pay. So either the firm should a) hold interviews via the telephone or videoconferencing systems for candidates that are out of market or b) not bother with out of market candidates if they are going to require in person interviews and not pay for transportation to the firm.

[anon168]

It's really sad to read the sense of entitlement in this thread, esp ITE.

Entitlement?

Paying $300-$500 to fly across the country for the chance at a job is not fair to place on a student with no income, who is incurring substantial debt. The firm knows what their applicant pool looks like, they have more income than the student, and they can potentially even obtain deductions for these expenses.

Students should not be paying for these types of things. The only reason they do is because the economy is bad enough that students will have a race to the bottom in search of those jobs.

You just proved my point. Thank you.

What?

Belief that life is -- or should be -- fair is the very seed upon which all entitlement sprouts.

You're already in law school. Time to grow up.

[dingbat]

that in this economy, a firm doesn't have to pay to fly a mediocre candidate out to see them, rather than just interview locally and/or those who go through the trouble (and effort) to come to them.

Why should a firm have to pay to fly a whole bunch of candidates across the country?

I no one said the firm ought to pay for everyone; only that the interviewee shouldn't have to pay. So either the firm should a) hold interviews via the telephone or videoconferencing systems for candidates that are out of market or b) not bother with out of market candidates if they are going to require in person interviews and not pay for transportation to the firm.

Why should they decline to interview a candidate willing to come to them?
I mean, I'm assuming they're not actively recruiting out of market, in which case a similar response would be to tell students not to apply out of market (problem solved)

[Lwoods]

Flying at your own expense to interview with a job you really want shows them you actually do want the job, would move to that city, etc. Think of it as an investment.

But maybe CCN kids don't have to be nearly as scrappy as folks in my position. Still, I think the benefit outweighs the cost.

[anon168]

Flying at your own expense to interview with a job you really want shows them you actually do want the job, would move to that city, etc. Think of it as an investment.

But maybe CCN kids don't have to be nearly as scrappy as folks in my position. Still, I think the benefit outweighs the cost.

That, my friend, is why if I were a betting man I'd put money on your chances of succeeding in life (not just law) over those "CCN kids".

[dingbat]

Flying at your own expense to interview with a job you really want shows them you actually do want the job, would move to that city, etc. Think of it as an investment.

But maybe CCN kids don't have to be nearly as scrappy as folks in my position. Still, I think the benefit outweighs the cost.

That, my friend, is why if I were a betting man I'd put money on your chances of succeeding in life (not just law) over those "CCN kids".