In general, how rigid is the prior experience qualification when hiring Associates? Forum

[Anonymous User]

There are many associate positions available that I am interested in applying for, but they often say "the qualified candidate will have X-Y years of experience in ABC law."

In general, how rigid are these experience qualifications?

Is my application likely just going to the trash without that experience?

[Anonymous User]

There are many associate positions available that I am interested in applying for, but they often say "the qualified candidate will have X-Y years of experience in ABC law."

In general, how rigid are these experience qualifications?

Is my application likely just going to the trash without that experience?

Depends. If you're a new grad likely, if you just don't have as much experience as they'd like, you might sneak through for an interview depending on your background.

[Anonymous User]

I will be a new grad.

I just see many people on different firm websites that are listed as "associates" when they are 2016 JD grads?

[Anonymous User]

If it's a job you want, it's worth it to apply. My firm just hired a 3L for a posting that asked for 1-3 years, people I know have been hired with only one or two years for postings that asked for 3-5, my former supervisor in charge of hiring at the NYCLU said they will credit clinic experience during law school in some cases, etc. Sometimes places need to compromise a little, and will lower their requirements to get someone good. You won't know unless you try.

[Anonymous User]

I will be a new grad.

I just see many people on different firm websites that are listed as "associates" when they are 2016 JD grads?

Sorry meant to say not likely. But agree with the below poster. You never know.

[Anonymous User]

I've gotten an offer when I sent in a resume without experience, and there was a posting for someone experienced (junior/mid level). I think at a minimum, the posting shows a need, and that's always better than cold emailing when there's no demonstrated need.

[elendinel]

I'd say it's rare that HR is strict about the year range they put in a listing. E.g. a 4th year is rarely going to be ignored for a listing asking for 5+ years, just for being a 4th year.

That said it's also rare for hiring to call in a new grad with absolutely no experience for a position asking for 5+ years of experience. The listed range generally gives you a sense of how much training they want to have to give you, and postings with high years generally mean they want someone who's going to come in needing almost no substantive training. Rare doesn't necessarily mean impossible though, if their need for anyone to do the work is high enough, or if they like you enough.