Top Law Schools

Purely hypothetical right now, but maybe coming down the pike for me. Let's say I have interviews with firms A and B. I like both of them, but B is my frontrunner without a doubt. B, however, is not making a hiring decision until early August even if candidates have other offers. A is deciding within a week. A and B are not located in the same city or even the same state. If I accepted an offer with A and then B later makes an offer, how bad is it to renege on acceptance of the offer with A to accept B's offer?

I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave. But I really want the job with B and B is not in the same city as A (therefore no harm to reputation). Also, I feel like employers get to do this with employees all the time.

Thoughts? Feel free to be critical here. I really want to think this through completely if I did it.

.

Shouldn't you have 28 days to accept? You can also ask A for an extension at that point and only commit if they force you to.

Anonymous User wrote: I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave

Most people only behave unethically when there is something that they really want...

kryptix wrote:Shouldn't you have 28 days to accept? You can also ask A for an extension at that point and only commit if they force you to.

OP here. This is not OCI/callback situation. So NALP rules do not apply.

I did this. It was hard and I regretted the situation. But I think my life and career were improved by the move and I think the life and career of my wife and kid were also improved. I liked the firm I backed out on, but family comes first. It might come back to haunt me if I ever want to move to the other city, but I think these firms have more to worry about than ruining the life of some former recruit.

Anonymous User wrote:Purely hypothetical right now, but maybe coming down the pike for me. Let's say I have interviews with firms A and B. I like both of them, but B is my frontrunner without a doubt. B, however, is not making a hiring decision until early August even if candidates have other offers. A is deciding within a week. A and B are not located in the same city or even the same state. If I accepted an offer with A and then B later makes an offer, how bad is it to renege on acceptance of the offer with A to accept B's offer?

I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave. But I really want the job with B and B is not in the same city as A (therefore no harm to reputation). Also, I feel like employers get to do this with employees all the time.

Thoughts? Feel free to be critical here. I really want to think this through completely if I did it.

I don't think this is unethical. Just do what you need to do to make sure you have a job. Turning down A on the hope you will get B would be stupid. Sticking with job A when you want to work in job B would be equally stupid.

Anonymous User wrote:Purely hypothetical right now, but maybe coming down the pike for me. Let's say I have interviews with firms A and B. I like both of them, but B is my frontrunner without a doubt. B, however, is not making a hiring decision until early August even if candidates have other offers. A is deciding within a week. A and B are not located in the same city or even the same state. If I accepted an offer with A and then B later makes an offer, how bad is it to renege on acceptance of the offer with A to accept B's offer?

I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave. But I really want the job with B and B is not in the same city as A (therefore no harm to reputation). Also, I feel like employers get to do this with employees all the time.

Thoughts? Feel free to be critical here. I really want to think this through completely if I did it.

I can tell you what I have done in situations like this (in non law jobs) and seems to be a fairly standard approach. Tell the first firm you need some time to consider the offer. One or two weeks is not that out of the ordinary to ask for. I would then call the second firm, inform them that you are really interested in working for them but, you have another offer and need to make a decision quickly. Ask them if there is any way they make a decision on your candidacy, and get back to you shortly. Most people will understand this situation, and do their best to get back to you in a reasonable amount of time. The added benefit of doing this is that you have showed firm B that you are really interested in them, and it makes you look desirable. Both are beneficial.

If this doesn't work, reneging is a tough call, and certainly has its drawbacks so, I really can't say.

blackhawkfan wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Purely hypothetical right now, but maybe coming down the pike for me. Let's say I have interviews with firms A and B. I like both of them, but B is my frontrunner without a doubt. B, however, is not making a hiring decision until early August even if candidates have other offers. A is deciding within a week. A and B are not located in the same city or even the same state. If I accepted an offer with A and then B later makes an offer, how bad is it to renege on acceptance of the offer with A to accept B's offer?

I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave. But I really want the job with B and B is not in the same city as A (therefore no harm to reputation). Also, I feel like employers get to do this with employees all the time.

Thoughts? Feel free to be critical here. I really want to think this through completely if I did it.

I can tell you what I have done in situations like this (in non law jobs) and seems to be a fairly standard approach. Tell the first firm you need some time to consider the offer. One or two weeks is not that out of the ordinary to ask for. I would then call the second firm, inform them that you are really interested in working for them but, you have another offer and need to make a decision quickly. Ask them if there is any way they make a decision on your candidacy, and get back to you shortly. Most people will understand this situation, and do their best to get back to you in a reasonable amount of time. The added benefit of doing this is that you have showed firm B that you are really interested in them, and it makes you look desirable. Both are beneficial.

If this doesn't work, reneging is a tough call, and certainly has its drawbacks so, I really can't say.

So say B's decision makers are going to be out of the office on vacation for the next few weeks. If I contacted them by e-mail to let them know I have an offer from A, would they actually consider my candidacy on vacation or just tell me to take A and forget about me? I wouldn't want to lose B by being upfront.

Anonymous User wrote:

blackhawkfan wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Purely hypothetical right now, but maybe coming down the pike for me. Let's say I have interviews with firms A and B. I like both of them, but B is my frontrunner without a doubt. B, however, is not making a hiring decision until early August even if candidates have other offers. A is deciding within a week. A and B are not located in the same city or even the same state. If I accepted an offer with A and then B later makes an offer, how bad is it to renege on acceptance of the offer with A to accept B's offer?

I know this is unethical and it's not normally how I behave. But I really want the job with B and B is not in the same city as A (therefore no harm to reputation). Also, I feel like employers get to do this with employees all the time.

Thoughts? Feel free to be critical here. I really want to think this through completely if I did it.

I can tell you what I have done in situations like this (in non law jobs) and seems to be a fairly standard approach. Tell the first firm you need some time to consider the offer. One or two weeks is not that out of the ordinary to ask for. I would then call the second firm, inform them that you are really interested in working for them but, you have another offer and need to make a decision quickly. Ask them if there is any way they make a decision on your candidacy, and get back to you shortly. Most people will understand this situation, and do their best to get back to you in a reasonable amount of time. The added benefit of doing this is that you have showed firm B that you are really interested in them, and it makes you look desirable. Both are beneficial.

If this doesn't work, reneging is a tough call, and certainly has its drawbacks so, I really can't say.

So say B's decision makers are going to be out of the office on vacation for the next few weeks. If I contacted them by e-mail to let them know I have an offer from A, would they actually consider my candidacy on vacation or just tell me to take A and forget about me? I wouldn't want to lose B by being upfront.

I haven't been part of hiring, so someone else might have a better answer for you. I have done this in the past, and it has resulted in me getting offers every time. Additionally, I have been told by recruiters that this is a highly effective strategy. As far as your situation goes, I can't imagine they would tell you not to worry about them if they are unable to accomodate a quicker response. I mean that seems like a bizarre reaction to me, and I have not heard of this happening before. I would think they would just tell you that they can't let you know until x time (I have heard of this before). It seems to defy reason that they would reject someone they want because he has a time sensitive offer. But, maybe someone who has done hiring could tell me I'm wrong on this count.

[/quote] I haven't been part of hiring, so someone else might have a better answer for you. I have done this in the past, and it has resulted in me getting offers every time. Additionally, I have been told by recruiters that this is a highly effective strategy. As far as your situation goes, I can't imagine they would tell you not to worry about them if they are unable to accomodate a quicker response. I mean that seems like a bizarre reaction to me, and I have not heard of this happening before. I would think they would just tell you that they can't let you know until x time (I have heard of this before). It seems to defy reason that they would reject someone they want because he has a time sensitive offer. But, maybe someone who has done hiring could tell me I'm wrong on this count.[/quote]


This is what I'd like to do ideally. If anyone has any experience with just being dismissed as a candidate at this point, please share.

You owe nothing to these firms. You owe a lot to yourself to be happy and content with your job. Do whatever you think is best for you.

There is nothing unethical. Yes, you may piss someone off, but who cares?

hiima3L wrote:You owe nothing to these firms. You owe a lot to yourself to be happy and content with your job. Do whatever you think is best for you.

There is nothing unethical. Yes, you may piss someone off, but who cares?

I wouldn't go quite this far (you do owe some general decency and decorum) but I agree with the sentiment. These firms wouldn't hesitate to drop your ass if things hit the fan for them, and you gotta look out for #1 in these situations.

romothesavior wrote:

hiima3L wrote:You owe nothing to these firms. You owe a lot to yourself to be happy and content with your job. Do whatever you think is best for you.

There is nothing unethical. Yes, you may piss someone off, but who cares?

I wouldn't go quite this far (you do owe some general decency and decorum) but I agree with the sentiment. These firms wouldn't hesitate to drop your ass if things hit the fan for them, and you gotta look out for #1 in these situations.

Thanks for all the comments. I hope that it will not come to reneging, but if it does, then I will handle it with as much respect and professionalism as is possible given the situation.