1L Summer acceptance regret Forum

[Anonymous User]

So a few weeks ago I accepted a USAO offer, and then today I got an SA interview invite. I was really excited for the USAO job, but now I am feeling some regret... Does anyone know if USAOs ever allow split summers?

I was worried that I might find myself in this situation, but I thought it would have been foolish to turn down a good summer offer in the hopes of getting an elusive SA interview. Any advice would be appreciated.

[drs36]

Do the 1L SA interview and see what happens. If you get it, take it. Backing out of an acceptance doesn't look good, but they'll understand. Most of the AUSA's come from BigLaw and know the track.

USAO is still unpaid, yes?

[Anonymous User]

I had to renege 1L summer when a better offer ($$$) came along, I did it by email. It was fine

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Thanks for your responses!

Assuming I did the SA interview and got the job (easier said than done) I would just feel really bad backing out on the USAO because I have already done the background check stuff. Ugh maybe I am too concerned about being ethical though.

Also what do I say if the firm asks me where else I am considering for the summer? I don't think I could lie about already having an offer...

[FloridaCoastalorbust]

Forget about feeling bad. This is your future. The only reason not to back out of the job you have lined up is if it could negatively impact your career. If it can't then drop it like it's hot.

Assuming you end up getting the SA of course.

[Anonymous User]

So a few weeks ago I accepted a USAO offer, and then today I got an SA interview invite. I was really excited for the USAO job, but now I am feeling some regret... Does anyone know if USAOs ever allow split summers?

I was worried that I might find myself in this situation, but I thought it would have been foolish to turn down a good summer offer in the hopes of getting an elusive SA interview. Any advice would be appreciated.

Disclaimer: 1L

I say interview and if you get it, renege via email. They'll have been in your shoes before and should understand. One question though: diversity SA?

[shifty_eyed]

USAO allows split summers

[Anonymous User]

OP here: non-diversity SA.

If USAO allows splits, do I tell the firm up front that I have that position already locked up? And would I not tell USAO about the firm/ask about splitting until after accepting the SA (assuming I got it)?

[drs36]

Don't split if you get the SA offer. Just renege.

Assuming you get an offer, see if you can do an externship with USAO during the school year.

[J. Unfriendly]

I wouldn't stress over anything until you get the SA offer.

[Anonymous User]

Don't split if you get the SA offer. Just renege.

Assuming you get an offer, see if you can do an externship with USAO during the school year.

Unfortunately I go to school in a different city than my hometown (where the USAO & firm are located).

[Anonymous User]

USAO allows split summers

I asked and they said that they don't. So it might vary from office to office

[Anonymous User]

I don't know, [wo]man, I would be tempted to just do the USAO gig. I did a 1L SA and a 2L SA, plus a USAO externship, and I can honestly say that the USAO gig carried a lot more weight on the resume.

The devil might be in the details. How bad do you need to make money this summer (I'm assuming not at all costs, otherwise you wouldn't have been considering the USAO to begin with)? How good is the 1L SA gig? How are your grades and what are your chances of landing a 2L SA gig?

I mean, you could do 1L at USAO and then 2L at lawfirm and get an offer from that. That would be better than doing both 1L and 2L at a firm, IMO. The problem is determining your risk of not landing the 2L SA and also determining if the 1L SA is a good path to a hire. If not, it's really no better than USAO anyway. Unlike 2L SA's, 1L SA's don't always carry a presumption that you could get a job offer.

Perfect situation would be if USAO just said you could do the fall semester there instead of the summer (the bg check should still be good), and you could do 1L SA, USAO, AND 2L SA.

[enibs]

Wow, is it really the case that no one thinks one's word means anything anymore? Everyone's advice is to renege if a better offer comes along?

Personally, I wouldn't do it because it's not right. But if you need a selfish reason, it could turn out pretty poorly in some scenarios. At our firm (have no idea how common this is), we won't interview you if we know you've already accepted an offer. If you don't tell us, and we give you an offer, and then find out you previously accepted another offer and have reneged on it, we would view it as your having misled us and we'll revoke your offer. Harsh? Maybe. But you shouldn't be interviewing with us if you've already accepted another offer.

[RaceJudicata]

Wow, is it really the case that no one thinks one's word means anything anymore? Everyone's advice is to renege if a better offer comes along?

Personally, I wouldn't do it because it's not right. But if you need a selfish reason, it could turn out pretty poorly in some scenarios. At our firm (have no idea how common this is), we won't interview you if we know you've already accepted an offer. If you don't tell us, and we give you an offer, and then find out you previously accepted another offer and have reneged on it, we would view it as your having misled us and we'll revoke your offer. Harsh? Maybe. But you shouldn't be interviewing with us if you've already accepted another offer.

Obviously not a knock on you (firm's prerogative to handle applicants however they please)... But yes, this is overly harsh. At some point we all have to look out for ourselves, because when push comes to shove, our employer (most likely) will not.

And when you boil it down, what is the difference between interviewing w/ a firm while you have accepted another offer versus interviewing with a firm while you are currently EMPLOYED by a firm looking to lateral? In my mind, your commitment to the firm is much stronger as an actual employee, rather than a pending hire. Just my $0.02.

[smallfirmassociate]

Wow, is it really the case that no one thinks one's word means anything anymore? Everyone's advice is to renege if a better offer comes along?

Personally, I wouldn't do it because it's not right. But if you need a selfish reason, it could turn out pretty poorly in some scenarios. At our firm (have no idea how common this is), we won't interview you if we know you've already accepted an offer. If you don't tell us, and we give you an offer, and then find out you previously accepted another offer and have reneged on it, we would view it as your having misled us and we'll revoke your offer. Harsh? Maybe. But you shouldn't be interviewing with us if you've already accepted another offer.

Eh, your firm would also tell all of its incoming SA's to fuck off if the alternative was going out of business. You know, at-will employment and all. Law students are in a position where all decisions carry a consequence of being fiscally insolvent, if made incorrectly.

Your firm doesn't really "take the high road" for any moral reason, but just because it has certain business reasons to do so. It has a reputation to uphold, it wants to maintain relationships with the schools at which it recruits, it wants to keep morale high among existing employees instead of showing disloyal behavior. Again, if the law firm was about to crash and burn, you can bet your ass all that "loyalty" wouldn't mean anything to it either. As a matter of fact, the partners would likely be violating their fiduciary duties if they put "loyalty" to individual employees (much less merely prospective employees!) ahead of solvency, a position which ironically implicates their "loyalty" (as a term of art) to the company.

Not attacking you personally, just saying your firm's policy is based on different factors and coming from a different position, but it's still nothing more noble than a simple business decision of the same type the student has to make.

[Tls2016]

Wow, is it really the case that no one thinks one's word means anything anymore? Everyone's advice is to renege if a better offer comes along?

Personally, I wouldn't do it because it's not right. But if you need a selfish reason, it could turn out pretty poorly in some scenarios. At our firm (have no idea how common this is), we won't interview you if we know you've already accepted an offer. If you don't tell us, and we give you an offer, and then find out you previously accepted another offer and have reneged on it, we would view it as your having misled us and we'll revoke your offer. Harsh? Maybe. But you shouldn't be interviewing with us if you've already accepted another offer.

No one is telling OP to lie about having an offer. This situation wouldn't come up with your firm because if you asked OP if he had an offer, then he would say yes, and you wouldn't interview him.
I agree that lying during an interview is wrong.
But that's much different than having a "better" job come along and changing your mind. I don't know if the firm job would be better, but OP isn't bound to stay with a job when he can find one that is a better fit. There is nothing unethical about it.

[Aeon]

OP, do you want to work in BigLaw or government? If it's the latter, the AUSA internship may help you to get your foot in the door. If you want BigLaw, and only BigLaw, then a 1L summer associateship is a great opportunity.

Employers have indeed been known to revoke accepted offers and fire people when it suited them -- such is at-will employment. Which doesn't make it right, of course, but that's the way business works these days. Personally, I consider my word my bond, and I wouldn't feel comfortable reneging on an offer that I had accepted. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

[enibs]

Wow, is it really the case that no one thinks one's word means anything anymore? Everyone's advice is to renege if a better offer comes along?

Personally, I wouldn't do it because it's not right. But if you need a selfish reason, it could turn out pretty poorly in some scenarios. At our firm (have no idea how common this is), we won't interview you if we know you've already accepted an offer. If you don't tell us, and we give you an offer, and then find out you previously accepted another offer and have reneged on it, we would view it as your having misled us and we'll revoke your offer. Harsh? Maybe. But you shouldn't be interviewing with us if you've already accepted another offer.

Eh, your firm would also tell all of its incoming SA's to fuck off if the alternative was going out of business. You know, at-will employment and all. Law students are in a position where all decisions carry a consequence of being fiscally insolvent, if made incorrectly.

Your firm doesn't really "take the high road" for any moral reason, but just because it has certain business reasons to do so. It has a reputation to uphold, it wants to maintain relationships with the schools at which it recruits, it wants to keep morale high among existing employees instead of showing disloyal behavior. Again, if the law firm was about to crash and burn, you can bet your ass all that "loyalty" wouldn't mean anything to it either. As a matter of fact, the partners would likely be violating their fiduciary duties if they put "loyalty" to individual employees (much less merely prospective employees!) ahead of solvency, a position which ironically implicates their "loyalty" (as a term of art) to the company.

Not attacking you personally, just saying your firm's policy is based on different factors and coming from a different position, but it's still nothing more noble than a simple business decision of the same type the student has to make.

I think you're being overly dramatic here. The choice between taking a 1L position with the USAO's office and a 1L position with a law firm is hardly an existential choice. If it were literally a matter of survival, I might understand. It's not. Indeed, depending on the firm, there's an argument that the USAO position is the better choice in any event.

And as for my firm, I think you're wrong. In the economic downturn, we did not lay people off, we did not rescind offers, we did not "no-offer" summers. The partners just took the hit. I know some firms did each of the above, but many did not. I'm happy to be at one of those that did not. (And by the way - and I've said this on the board before - I think what Latham did in laying off first-year associates was shameful.)

[Tls2016]

OP, do you want to work in BigLaw or government? If it's the latter, the AUSA internship may help you to get your foot in the door. If you want BigLaw, and only BigLaw, then a 1L summer associateship is a great opportunity.

Employers have indeed been known to revoke accepted offers and fire people when it suited them -- such is at-will employment. Which doesn't make it right, of course, but that's the way business works these days. Personally, I consider my word my bond, and I wouldn't feel comfortable reneging on an offer that I had accepted. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

I don't think even old fashioned people would object to someone taking a paying job over a volunteer position. That sounds unreasonable to me.

[Aeon]

OP, do you want to work in BigLaw or government? If it's the latter, the AUSA internship may help you to get your foot in the door. If you want BigLaw, and only BigLaw, then a 1L summer associateship is a great opportunity.

Employers have indeed been known to revoke accepted offers and fire people when it suited them -- such is at-will employment. Which doesn't make it right, of course, but that's the way business works these days. Personally, I consider my word my bond, and I wouldn't feel comfortable reneging on an offer that I had accepted. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

I don't think even old fashioned people would object to someone taking a paying job over a volunteer position. That sounds unreasonable to me.

If it's a question of choosing between two offers, sure. But if you've already accepted an offer, then you've given your word and ought to honor it. Sometimes doing the right thing isn't the most financially remunerative option.

[Anonymous User]

OP here.

Thanks for all the good replies guys--I really appreciate it!

Responding to an earlier inquiry: I don't think this SA position would be all that important in terms of me getting a 2L SA. I am top 1-3% at a lower T14, so my prospects for next year are probably pretty solid no matter what I do this summer.

I spoke to a professor earlier this afternoon about this dilemma and his advice was to bite the bullet and do the USAO. He said that yes, it will suck to not make money this summer, but it could actually be better experience to do USAO (as someone mentioned above). Specifically, if I want to go for clerkships he thought it might be good to have more than just firm work on my resume.

So right now I am leaning towards USAO. Still feeling torn though. This is one of the firms I am really interested in working for next summer and after graduation...

[landshoes]

I'd be really scandalized by this (1L, though). They've already gone through the background check. They've invested in you working there. "I can get a better offer" is not a good reason to break your word, unless it's truly necessary.

Practically, if you're competitive for a 1L SA you'll be competitive for 2L. So it's not some kind of career move that you can't say no to.

People saying the offices they reneged on "didn't mind" don't have a lot of weight. No one is going to send you a nasty email even if they are pissed.

How much them being pissed matters, I don't know. Some legal communities are much smaller than you think. But I don't have much information on how this is perceived, except the person in this thread who works in BigLaw who says he thinks it's really shabby.

Beyond the moral component, if I found out about this, I would be a bit skeptical of your judgment. If you really needed that summer associate job, why were you doing US attorney office interviews? If you didn't need it, why did you risk people pissing people off just to get a slight (or no) advantage?

[landshoes]

Reading your update, going against the advice of a prof who is going to (ideally) recommend you for a clerkship, so you can get a job you don't need, seems like a bad idea.

[Tls2016]

OP, do you want to work in BigLaw or government? If it's the latter, the AUSA internship may help you to get your foot in the door. If you want BigLaw, and only BigLaw, then a 1L summer associateship is a great opportunity.

Employers have indeed been known to revoke accepted offers and fire people when it suited them -- such is at-will employment. Which doesn't make it right, of course, but that's the way business works these days. Personally, I consider my word my bond, and I wouldn't feel comfortable reneging on an offer that I had accepted. But perhaps I'm just old-fashioned.

I don't think even old fashioned people would object to someone taking a paying job over a volunteer position. That sounds unreasonable to me.

If it's a question of choosing between two offers, sure. But if you've already accepted an offer, then you've given your word and ought to honor it. Sometimes doing the right thing isn't the most financially remunerative option.

There really is no concept of the "right thing" here. Peoples circumstances change. It happens, employers are used to it.
We are talking about the USAO here, not some Mom and Pop operation that is going to fold if OP doesn't show up to intern for them for free.
I just hope people understand that employers are going to expect you to watch out for your own career. No one else will be.
OP should probably stay with the USAO because it might be the best move for his career, though if he was commited I'm not sure why he applied to firm jobs in the first place? But that is the reason OP should stay. If the USAO was worse for his career than I would say go to the other job if you can get it.