UVA OGI 2019 Forum

[wawho]

Since no one else is making it...

Historical Thread Rules:
- Only current/former UVA students can post.
- Keep advice and information specific to UVA.
- Confidential information from OPP should be kept confidential.
- Shame anyone that calls it "OCI"

[Anonymous User]

Anyone else concerned about UVA's NALP replacement policy? The fact that it's so variable from firm to firm based on their recruiting makes it really hard for us to know what kinds of terms the firms have to give us. And if they know the policy and know where they're recruiting, they've got a leg up on applicants because we don't necessarily know what the best school they're recruiting at is doing.

[Br3v]

Happy to field any questions current students might have. Best of luck!

[Cogburn1984]

Should I shave my beard completely or can I roll with some neatly trimmed facial hair (beard and mustache)?

[Anonymous User]

Should I shave my beard completely or can I roll with some neatly trimmed facial hair (beard and mustache)?

I think everyone I knew shaved their beards for OGI even if they had rocked a beard all 1L. But I don't see why neatly trimmed facial hair would be a problem

[VirginiaFan]

Another alum of OGI here, happy to answer questions.

[JHP]

Should I shave my beard completely or can I roll with some neatly trimmed facial hair (beard and mustache)?

As long as it looks clean and professional, it shouldn't be a problem. That being said, maybe it depends a little where you're recruiting. I saw fewer people with facial hair in the NY, Boston, and LA recruiting spheres, but maybe if you are looking elsewhere, the general aesthetic is different.

[cornerstone]

Anyone else concerned about UVA's NALP replacement policy? The fact that it's so variable from firm to firm based on their recruiting makes it really hard for us to know what kinds of terms the firms have to give us. And if they know the policy and know where they're recruiting, they've got a leg up on applicants because we don't necessarily know what the best school they're recruiting at is doing.

Not sure I follow what you're asking about. What is a "NALP replacement policy" and what "terms" are you concerned about? Who are the "they"?

[Anonymous User]

Anyone else concerned about UVA's NALP replacement policy? The fact that it's so variable from firm to firm based on their recruiting makes it really hard for us to know what kinds of terms the firms have to give us. And if they know the policy and know where they're recruiting, they've got a leg up on applicants because we don't necessarily know what the best school they're recruiting at is doing.

Not sure I follow what you're asking about. What is a "NALP replacement policy" and what "terms" are you concerned about? Who are the "they"?

NALP used to have rules that governed the terms of any offer that a NALP firm made. Those rules were all abolished in December.

Schools are now creating their own sets of rules that firms must follow when recruiting their students to replace the old NALP rules.

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

"They" refers to the recruiters. They know who they're recruiting and therefore know what they need to offer us to be compliant. Applicants and the career services department do not necessarily have access to that same data, making it almost impossible to ensure that the firm is actually following the rules, or to predict what kinds of terms they might give. In the post-NALP landscape, exploding offers are now possible - it would be nice to know in advance whether a firm is able to give us an exploding offer.

[cornerstone]

Anyone else concerned about UVA's NALP replacement policy? The fact that it's so variable from firm to firm based on their recruiting makes it really hard for us to know what kinds of terms the firms have to give us. And if they know the policy and know where they're recruiting, they've got a leg up on applicants because we don't necessarily know what the best school they're recruiting at is doing.

Not sure I follow what you're asking about. What is a "NALP replacement policy" and what "terms" are you concerned about? Who are the "they"?

NALP used to have rules that governed the terms of any offer that a NALP firm made. Those rules were all abolished in December.

Schools are now creating their own sets of rules that firms must follow when recruiting their students to replace the old NALP rules.

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

"They" refers to the recruiters. They know who they're recruiting and therefore know what they need to offer us to be compliant. Applicants and the career services department do not necessarily have access to that same data, making it almost impossible to ensure that the firm is actually following the rules, or to predict what kinds of terms they might give. In the post-NALP landscape, exploding offers are now possible - it would be nice to know in advance whether a firm is able to give us an exploding offer.

I see. Call me naive but I don't think this is going to make much of a difference at all because firms know students talk. If I heard that a firm was giving out abnormal terms such as exploding offers, etc. I'd just skip the callback. Simple as that. And that firm will learn pretty quickly that their new terms don't pay off.

There's a reason most of these firms hire at the same time in the same way and offer the same compensation/benefits packages - nobody wants to buck the trend. I don't see why a firm would choose to give out substantially different terms to an HLS student vs. a UVA student, for example, given the backlash they would get if word got out. Could you really envision a hiring committee even considering, much less deciding to give students from one school a longer time to accept than another? Sounds arbitrary to me.

I guess I could see this making a difference for some smaller elite firms like WLRK or BSF, but chances are if you're taking a callback there you have a pretty good idea that you want to go there and understand that the name on your diploma and numbers on your transcript mean everything.

Is there a particular term that you're worried UVA students are going to get screwed on?

[albanach]

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

This opens up a number of questions...

Is this a policy, or a contract with the firms? How is it enforced (is there an arbitration clause)? Are the students identified as intended third party beneficiaries? Would UVA enforce it if a firm offered a HYS grads better terms, and f so, what would the damages be? If there's liquidated damages, who receives them, the school or the injured student?

[cornerstone]

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

This opens up a number of questions...

Is this a policy, or a contract with the firms? How is it enforced (is there an arbitration clause)? Are the students identified as intended third party beneficiaries? Would UVA enforce it if a firm offered a HYS grads better terms, and f so, what would the damages be? If there's liquidated damages, who receives them, the school or the injured student?

All good questions. Better get the summers on it before they leave. Thankfully our HYS summers are secretly staying for an extra two weeks before their paid vacation afterward.

[Anonymous User]

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

This opens up a number of questions...

Is this a policy, or a contract with the firms? How is it enforced (is there an arbitration clause)? Are the students identified as intended third party beneficiaries? Would UVA enforce it if a firm offered a HYS grads better terms, and f so, what would the damages be? If there's liquidated damages, who receives them, the school or the injured student?

My understanding is that these are preconditions the firms must accept in order to participate in OGI. The penalty for breaking them would be losing access to the program.

[Anonymous User]

Anyone else concerned about UVA's NALP replacement policy? The fact that it's so variable from firm to firm based on their recruiting makes it really hard for us to know what kinds of terms the firms have to give us. And if they know the policy and know where they're recruiting, they've got a leg up on applicants because we don't necessarily know what the best school they're recruiting at is doing.

Not sure I follow what you're asking about. What is a "NALP replacement policy" and what "terms" are you concerned about? Who are the "they"?

NALP used to have rules that governed the terms of any offer that a NALP firm made. Those rules were all abolished in December.

Schools are now creating their own sets of rules that firms must follow when recruiting their students to replace the old NALP rules.

UVA's policy is that an office of a firm must give UVA students terms that are as good or better than the terms given to any other students that they recruit.

"They" refers to the recruiters. They know who they're recruiting and therefore know what they need to offer us to be compliant. Applicants and the career services department do not necessarily have access to that same data, making it almost impossible to ensure that the firm is actually following the rules, or to predict what kinds of terms they might give. In the post-NALP landscape, exploding offers are now possible - it would be nice to know in advance whether a firm is able to give us an exploding offer.

I see. Call me naive but I don't think this is going to make much of a difference at all because firms know students talk. If I heard that a firm was giving out abnormal terms such as exploding offers, etc. I'd just skip the callback. Simple as that. And that firm will learn pretty quickly that their new terms don't pay off.

There's a reason most of these firms hire at the same time in the same way and offer the same compensation/benefits packages - nobody wants to buck the trend. I don't see why a firm would choose to give out substantially different terms to an HLS student vs. a UVA student, for example, given the backlash they would get if word got out. Could you really envision a hiring committee even considering, much less deciding to give students from one school a longer time to accept than another? Sounds arbitrary to me.

I guess I could see this making a difference for some smaller elite firms like WLRK or BSF, but chances are if you're taking a callback there you have a pretty good idea that you want to go there and understand that the name on your diploma and numbers on your transcript mean everything.

Is there a particular term that you're worried UVA students are going to get screwed on?

Overall I think you're right, particularly in the biggest legal markets, but you might be surprised how weird things can get. For instance, Kirkland is offering signing bonuses in DC to students who accept their offers before OGI begins. STB gave an offer out of one of their CA offices that expired before OGI began. And a number of firms that initially entered OGI ultimately withdrew from the program after receiving applicants' resumes and reached out individually to the applicants they were interested in to set up phone screeners.

What I'm most worried about is timing. I don't want to find myself in a situation where I get an offer that's got a short period for acceptance. In the future, when firms have developed reputations for how they act in the post-NALP world, this will be less of an issue. But right now it's hard to know what any particular firm might do.

[albanach]

My understanding is that these are preconditions the firms must accept in order to participate in OGI. The penalty for breaking them would be losing access to the program.

Great if true, but when a school's ranking is influenced by employment outcomes, do we think the school would actually turn an employer away?

I'm not suggesting this is or will be a problem. I just find it unusual that the school has apparently proclaimed this most favored nation type clause that, at least to me, seems worthless for so long as there's no way for a student who is, or fears being, harmed to enforce it.

[Anonymous User]

My understanding is that these are preconditions the firms must accept in order to participate in OGI. The penalty for breaking them would be losing access to the program.

Great if true, but when a school's ranking is influenced by employment outcomes, do we think the school would actually turn an employer away?

I'm not suggesting this is or will be a problem. I just find it unusual that the school has apparently proclaimed this most favored nation type clause that, at least to me, seems worthless for so long as there's no way for a student who is, or fears being, harmed to enforce it.

This is a big part of my concern. AFAIK, all of the T14s have some kind of policy enforced by threatened exclusion from OCI, but the others are much more clear cut which allows the school to be a more effective arbiter and keep the student from having to get as involved. Even then, I've got my doubts about how long firms will abide by them - especially if they can find their applicants without doing OCI.

[cornerstone]

My understanding is that these are preconditions the firms must accept in order to participate in OGI. The penalty for breaking them would be losing access to the program.

Great if true, but when a school's ranking is influenced by employment outcomes, do we think the school would actually turn an employer away?

I'm not suggesting this is or will be a problem. I just find it unusual that the school has apparently proclaimed this most favored nation type clause that, at least to me, seems worthless for so long as there's no way for a student who is, or fears being, harmed to enforce it.

This is a big part of my concern. AFAIK, all of the T14s have some kind of policy enforced by threatened exclusion from OCI, but the others are much more clear cut which allows the school to be a more effective arbiter and keep the student from having to get as involved. Even then, I've got my doubts about how long firms will abide by them - especially if they can find their applicants without doing OCI.

*OGI...

You’re right that it’s a shaky enforcement regime on its own but I think this is losing sight of two things. First, no firm is going to do something that sets it apart in a bad way. So KE wants to give bonuses for skirting OGI? Big deal. We already know KE tries to brand itself as a market leader in compensation in exchange for sweatshop hours, and that’s either going to draw people into accepting early or push students away to other comparable firms who think it’s rude to try to game the system. People already make that decision without KE’s updated OGI practices so I don’t see why letting that bleed in now is any different.

Second, the sky isn’t going to fall. Pushback if you disagree, but firms still get a benefit to conducting a bazillion screeners all at one place and one time. There may be some outliers, but just like lockstep industrywide compensation, nobody is going to buck the trend here because the benefits (catching a couple people early or via some other form of coercion like exploding offers) are going to be offset by the social shaming that will ensue. By all means, give out exploding offers WLRK, and pay bonuses KE, but I think your run of the mill firm is going to want to go to OGI in the same way they always have.

It’s also a good point that all of this may not be applicable outside the T14, but last I checked this was a UVA OGI thread... I still fail to see why this is going to be a significant issue, or even one at all, for anybody this year at OGI. If we want to get all prisoner’s dilemma-y and show off our 1L attempts at game theory then perhaps a there’s a better place for that.

[Anonymous User]

My understanding is that these are preconditions the firms must accept in order to participate in OGI. The penalty for breaking them would be losing access to the program.

Great if true, but when a school's ranking is influenced by employment outcomes, do we think the school would actually turn an employer away?

I'm not suggesting this is or will be a problem. I just find it unusual that the school has apparently proclaimed this most favored nation type clause that, at least to me, seems worthless for so long as there's no way for a student who is, or fears being, harmed to enforce it.

This is a big part of my concern. AFAIK, all of the T14s have some kind of policy enforced by threatened exclusion from OCI, but the others are much more clear cut which allows the school to be a more effective arbiter and keep the student from having to get as involved. Even then, I've got my doubts about how long firms will abide by them - especially if they can find their applicants without doing OCI.

*OGI...

You’re right that it’s a shaky enforcement regime on its own but I think this is losing sight of two things. First, no firm is going to do something that sets it apart in a bad way. So KE wants to give bonuses for skirting OGI? Big deal. We already know KE tries to brand itself as a market leader in compensation in exchange for sweatshop hours, and that’s either going to draw people into accepting early or push students away to other comparable firms who think it’s rude to try to game the system. People already make that decision without KE’s updated OGI practices so I don’t see why letting that bleed in now is any different.

Second, the sky isn’t going to fall. Pushback if you disagree, but firms still get a benefit to conducting a bazillion screeners all at one place and one time. There may be some outliers, but just like lockstep industrywide compensation, nobody is going to buck the trend here because the benefits (catching a couple people early or via some other form of coercion like exploding offers) are going to be offset by the social shaming that will ensue. By all means, give out exploding offers WLRK, and pay bonuses KE, but I think your run of the mill firm is going to want to go to OGI in the same way they always have.

It’s also a good point that all of this may not be applicable outside the T14, but last I checked this was a UVA OGI thread... I still fail to see why this is going to be a significant issue, or even one at all, for anybody this year at OGI. If we want to get all prisoner’s dilemma-y and show off our 1L attempts at game theory then perhaps a there’s a better place for that.

You make some good points. It's probably premature for us to be getting overly worried about this.

[Anonymous User]

How likely is it that I'll be asked to give a cogent explanation for bad grade(s).

[Br3v]

How likely is it that I'll be asked to give a cogent explanation for bad grade(s).

If we told you it wasn’t likely, would you not prepare an answer?

Be ready to provide a brief explanation (not an excuse) and move on. Poeple aren’t going to hold one or two grades against you forever, but it would be foolish to not have an explanation ready.