Tuesday, August 30, 2011

OCIPin' on a 40

Update, 8-16-11: See Rule Number 2.
_____________________________________________________

It's time for the annual OCIP thread here on N&B.  For those of you who are unfamiliar, here is a short explanation (you should also probably consult last year's thread and follow the links in that post to educate yourself). In essence, this thread is to inform those who want to be informed of such things when firms send out offers and/or rejections following OCIP. OCIP is a stressful process and it brings out the best and often the worst in people. If you feel OCIP is a notch below the library during exam times then you might want to skip this thread.

No, you're still curious and want to participate? OK, here are the rules:

1. We will take comments posted below regarding offers/rejections and incorporate them into the body of this post. The process is tedious and generally not fun. There's a lot you can do to expedite things along.

2. PLEASE READ THE BODY OF THIS POST AND THE LAST FEW COMMENTS TO SEE IF ANYONE HAS POSTED THE SAME OFFER/REJECTION THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO POST.

3. SEE NUMBER 2.

4. Post the offers/rejections in the following format:
Firm name, Office, +/- to indicate offer/rejection respectively. For example:

Orrick, SF +.
The location abbreviations are as follows:
Atl -- Atlanta; Bos -- Boston; Chi -- Chicago; Dal -- Dallas; DC -- DC; EBay -- East Bay locations (Oakland, Walnut Creek, etc.); LA -- LA area offices (includes Century City); Mia = Miami and South Florida; Minn -- Minnesota; NY -- New York/New Jersey; OC -- Orange County area offices; Por -- Portland; Sac -- Sacramento; SD -- San Diego; SF -- San Francisco; SV -- Silicon Valley offices (includes Palo Alto, San Jose, Menlo Park, and all other South Bay locations).
5. This is now the seventh OCIP that N&B has had this thread. Without failure, each previous thread contained comments that were ummm worthy of staying up. So, while we will delete comments that are only posting +/-, more substantive comments will stay up. At the same time, it's probably wise not to identify yourself to your prospective employers. So don't write anything silly that's going to reveal who you are.

Best of luck to all of you, but for the love all that is holy and good, please follow Rules 2 and 3.

***
Allen Matkins, SF +
Arent Fox, NY -
Arnold & Porter, DC -, LA -, SF -
Baker Botts, SV +
Baker Hostetler, DC -
Baker & McKenzie, SF -
Bingham, LA +, SF +/-
Boies Schiller, DC +, NY +, OAK +
Brownstein, DEN +/-
Bryan Cave, LA +, SF +
Cadwalader, DC +
Cahill Gordon, NY +
Cleary Gottlieb, DC +/-, NY +/-
Cooley, NY +, SF +/-, SV +
Covington Burling, DC -, SF +/-
Cravath, NY +/-
Crowell & Moring, DC -, OC +, SF +/-
Davis Polk, NY +/-, SV +/-
Debevoise, NY +/-
Dechert, NY -, SF +, SV +
Dewey & LeBoeuf, NY +, SF +/-
DLA Piper, SD +, SF +, SV +
Drinker Biddle, SF +
Farella Braun, SF, +/-
Fenwick & West, SV +
Foley, DC+/-, SF +
Gibson Dunn, DC -, LA +/-, NY +/-, SF -, SV +
Goodwin Procter, BOS +/-, LA +, SF +/-, SV +
Hogan Lovells, DC +, NY -, SF +
Howard Rice, SF +/-
Irell, LA +/-, OC +/-
Jeffer Mangels, LA +
Jenner & Block, CHI -, LA +
Jones Day, DC +, NY +/-, SF +/-, SV +/-
King & Spalding, SF -
Kirkland, SF +
K&L Gates, SF +, Sea +
Keker, SF -
Knobbe, LA -
Kramer Levin, NY +
Latham Watkins, DC -, LA +, NY +, SF +/-, SV +/-
Lieff Cabraser SF -
Lowenstein Sandler, SV -
Manatt Phelps, LA +
Mayer Brown, CHI -, SV +/-
McDermott, LA +, SV +/-
Morgan Lewis, SF +, SV +
Morrison & Foerster, LA +/-, SD +/-, SF +/-, SV +
Munger LA, +/-
Nixon Peabody, SF +
Norton Rose, LON +
O'Melveny, DC +/-, LA +/-, OC +, SF +/-, SHA +/-, SV +/-
Orrick, LA +, SF+/-, SV +
Paul Hastings, DC +, LA +/-, SF +/-, SD -, SV +
Paul Weiss, NY +/-
Perkins Coie, SF -
Pillsbury, SF +
Proskauer Rose, LA +
Quinn, SF +/-, SV +
Reed Smith, LA +, SF +/-
Ropes & Gray, NY +
Rutan & Tucker, OC-
Sedgwick, SF +
Severson & Werson, SF +
Shartsis Friese, SF +/-
Shearman & Sterling, SF +
Sheppard Mullin, LA +, OC +/-, SF +/-
Sidley Austin, DC +/-, LA +, SF +/-, SV +/-
Simpson Thacher, LA +, NY +/-
Skadden, LA +, NY +, SV +
Stoel Rives, SEA -
Stradling Yocca, OC-
Sullivan & Cromwell, LA +, NY +
Troutman Sanders, OC +
Vinson & Elkins, HOU, +
Wachtell, NY +/-
Warren & Gunn, SF +
Weil, NY +/-, SV +/-
White & Case, LA +/-, SV +/-
Wilmer, DC +/-, LA +, NY -, SV +/-
Wilson Sonsini, SV +/-
Winston & Strawn, SF -

Labels:

132 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Could you include special notations, like * for 3L callbacks; ~ for non-OCIP callbacks (e.g., Loyola; Bay-area diversity job fair, etc.)?

Thank you.

8/08/2011 10:01 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

In years past, I have not distinguished between 3L and 2L offers. Last year, there was a greater than usual demand for it, but we still did not make the distinction out of concern for your own well-being.

I realize that on the one hand 3L OCIP is particularly stressful, especially if you do not have an offer in hand. On the other, 3L OCIP is a very, very small world. Most firms do not make multiple offers, and if they do it's a multiple of 2 but less than 4. Bottom line, there is absolutely no anonymity for those who post 3L offers. Along with the added stress of going through OCIP again, I assume the 3Ls don't need the stress of wondering if their prospective employer is going to think differently after finding out that they posted about their offer on some blog.

If anyone has any ideas or thoughts about the conundrum that I have described, I'm always willing to listen. But for the time being, at least on a forum this public, I'm inclined to not distinguish between 3L and 2L offers.

8/08/2011 10:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If a 3L is willing to post the callback, let them do it. This will help make the process much quicker and less painful than it has to be for us 3Ls.

8/08/2011 10:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3Ls have already come to grips with the fact that we have a lottery ticket's chance of getting a callback, and are probably headed towards careers which pay similarly to secretarial work.

We live with the reality that after hearing about the 2011 grad's job hunts that we have a strong chance to end up unemployed or temping. So no, a callback posting is not going to add to stress, most of us have already made peace with the reality of the job hunt.

8/08/2011 11:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Helpful comment from last year:

I got a callback from a firm 2 days after it was posted here. Lesson for everyone: they don't all come out at the same time, the fact that it's posted on N+B and you didn't get it does not equate to a ding.

8/09/2011 6:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Orrick, SF - (via phone call. cruel.)
Weil, NY +
Cleary Gottleib, DC +

8/09/2011 11:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do employers generally let an interviewee know one way or the other? Or do they simply let things languish if they aren't interested?

8/10/2011 8:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They will let you know. It may be a while before they contact you either way, but in my experience, they always let me know.

8/10/2011 8:42 AM  
Blogger McTwo said...

Most employers reject by mail (Orrick is a notable exception).

8/10/2011 8:58 AM  
Blogger Armen said...

If anyone wants to do me a huge favor, you can collect all the comments from years past regarding Orrick's phone call rejection.

8/10/2011 9:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wouldn't you rather know instantly about your rejection by phone as opposed to receiving a form letter two weeks later which doesn't state a reason for the rejection?

Isn't a phone call the more personable way to inform someone of a decision?

8/10/2011 12:53 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

No. Here's why

8/10/2011 1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cleary, NY +
Latham, LA +
WilmerHale, NY -

8/10/2011 4:30 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

SEE RULE 2 AND 3!!!!!!!!!

8/10/2011 4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bingham +

8/10/2011 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry, that is Bingham, SF

8/10/2011 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nixon Peabody isn't coming until tomorrow, I thought...

8/11/2011 7:06 AM  
Blogger Armen said...

7:06, it could be an offer from an earlier fair or some such thing. I'll be nice and assume the best. But if it's some troll who gets a kick out of passing along false info, making busy people work even more, then I'm going to lose my shit. So I appreciate your vigilance.

8/11/2011 9:11 AM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Since when did they stop calling it OCI and start calling it something pronounced "EEW"?

8/11/2011 9:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think they changed it when they moved it to before classes even start. I think it stands for early interview week.

8/11/2011 9:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2L here. Is it me or does it seem awfully quiet here? Maybe the early schedule means that callbacks are going to take longer than normal.

8/11/2011 1:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

for those with white & case LA callback, did you get the email yet?

8/11/2011 4:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Quinn SV person - did you get the callback during the interview? I just got invited to dinner :(

8/11/2011 4:25 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

Must be terrible.

8/11/2011 4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whoa whoa whoa, no need to bust out racial slurs. . .

8/11/2011 5:41 PM  
Anonymous boalt '06 said...

Keep in mind that firms may still have summer programs running and it does take some time to offer call backs.

Moving callbacks earlier and earlier does impact how quickly firms can turn around and make offers.

Good luck to everyone.

8/11/2011 5:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@4:16 - no, no e-mail from White and Case yet...I think my interviewer said that it would be coming early next week.

8/12/2011 8:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

O'Melveny SV

8/12/2011 3:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

McDermot -
Gunderson +

8/12/2011 3:42 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

3:40, I need you to tell me whether OMM is a +/-.

3:42, I need you to identify offices for your +/-.

8/12/2011 3:45 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

3:42 could also benefit from correctly spelling the name of a prospective employer.

Along the same lines, I think mispronouncing a firm name during an interview is both amusing and awkward. Dechert is probably the most common in that category.

8/12/2011 5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What does this say about me as a person if I don't get a callback? How does one start a prostitution ring?

8/13/2011 12:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It doesn't say anything about you as a person.

8/13/2011 3:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It doesn't say anything about you as a person--unless you have great grades. In that case it says that you come off as a serial killer.

8/14/2011 6:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sheppard Mullin, OC+

8/14/2011 11:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That just, like, your opinion, man.

8/15/2011 7:08 AM  
Blogger Armen said...

You don't go out looking for a job dressed like that? On a Wednesday?

8/15/2011 12:08 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

*Weekday, not Wednesday. Thank you Little Lebowski Urban Achievers for calling out the error to my attention.

8/15/2011 12:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who would want to work at a firm called Shartsis?

8/15/2011 1:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

At what point should we start turning down call backs?

8/15/2011 3:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FYI - Today I got Morgan Lewis SF, +, and Nixon Peabody SF +, despite the fact that that these were posted early last week. M&G's recruiter was out of town. So this is another illustration that while these postings can be helpful they don't necessarily mean you won't get a callback.

8/15/2011 4:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If that is the position you're in, nice work, and do so early in case other Boalties have been put on "hold."

I'm an alum, we've given deferred callbacks before when someone has dropped.

8/15/2011 4:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and by M&G I of course meant M&L...

8/15/2011 4:22 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

I am happy for those of you who have gotten callbacks (congratulations) and I am pulling for those who have not yet received that phone call (hang in there). OCI (or "EIW" or whatever) is a tough time for everyone, and I am relieved to hear that there have been no bodily assaults or casual sex in the break room -- both of which are disturbingly common 2L stress relievers at this time of year. All in all it seems like things are going well.

But I am capable of being happy and exceedingly frustrated at the same time. Please -- it is difficult to describe what a pain in the ass it is when students post a laundry list of callbacks that already are in the main thread, but suffice it to say that it is painful enough to make me write snarky/whiny sentences like this one. If I spend as much time combing through, separating, and deleting redundant comments tomorrow morning as I did this morning, I will stop updating this thread. Please, pay attention and post only new data. Thanks.

Again, congrats to those with callbacks, and a huge "hang in there" for those still waiting. I'm pulling for you all!

8/16/2011 7:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any cbs from the 3l bloodbath?

8/16/2011 9:41 AM  
Blogger McTwo said...

@3:57

If you feel like you need more information about a firm before you would be able to choose one way or another, keep the callback (if you have time to do it).

If you know you would not choose that firm, however, you should not take the callback slot just out of course.

This is the same general advice which holds for when offers start coming in as well. Writhing in false agony only does disservice to all parties involved.

8/16/2011 9:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NY and NJ should not be the same category. Some NY firms have offices in Manhattan AND NJ, so to just post NY + would be misleading.

8/16/2011 11:42 AM  
Blogger Armen said...

Would you like us to make your bed for you while we're at it?

8/16/2011 11:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Armen, it's comments like that that make me sad I don't know you in real life. I think that I...I might love you.

8/16/2011 12:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Before turning down a callback, find out if there is a free lunch first. If so, then don't turn it down. It's free food, and we all know how much law students love free food.

8/16/2011 5:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@5:21-free food is all well and good, but is there a certain number at which we should just stop (e.g., over 20, over 25, etc...)?

8/16/2011 8:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@8:39 you don't have 20 or 25 call backs so quit trippin.

8/16/2011 11:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@11:07 - Correct, I certainly do not. I was just pointing out how at a certain point (and perhaps 20 was too much hyperbole) doing too many call backs is counterproductive, even if they offer free food.

8/17/2011 8:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do you hate eating or something? They always take you to good restaurants so enjoy your 20-25 callbacks!

8/17/2011 10:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:54 here...I'm sorry, Patrick, for not seeing the "SV" after Sidley. I swear that I looked before I posted. I really appreciate you maintaining this list.

8/17/2011 6:57 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

It's comments like 6:54/57 that take the fire and brimstone right out of my belly. De nada, and thanks for the kind follow-up.

Good luck in SV!

8/17/2011 7:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what the hell, it's time for OCIP already?! Good luck, y'all!

8/17/2011 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kips, Berkeley +

8/18/2011 5:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Kips wasn't at EIW, and I thought they weren't taking applications. It's not kind to lie to your fellow boalties.

8/18/2011 8:19 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Any word on how 3L's did?

8/18/2011 2:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

(╯°□°)╯︵ ʞǝǝʍ ʍǝıʌɹǝʇuı ʎןɹɐǝ

8/18/2011 3:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3L here, know basically every person who interviewed, know of zero callbacks. Yay! If a 3L asked this question... standing strong with you brother... if a 2L asked, OCI was your last chance at landing a high paying gig.

For all those who struck out at OCI, it's an emotionally taxing situation but remember its mostly about the market and not you. 60% of Boalties strike out.

For those who struck out, you need to realize that you missed your opportunity (barring a miracle) to make money that would justify investing another 150k in your law degree. You will be lucky to find a full time position paying 60k. For me, my enjoyment of law was enough to stay in school, but for others I suggest you consider how much you are willing to sacrifice financially to (hopefully) practice as a lawyer.

8/18/2011 7:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3L Here. It looks like there are at least a few callbacks for Severson. No word from other firms. However, I was under the impression that most firm won't know their hiring needs until they hear back from all of the students that they extended permanent offers to. So we might just have to wait a little bit longer. No dings yet!

8/18/2011 9:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

7:00, I appreciate 9:48's optimism. I think you're being overly negative about this and I'm coming from someone who didn't do EIW.

Your 60% comment is entirely false. 100% of Boalties do not go through the private law firm OCI experience so, in fact, the success rate is a lot higher than you are making it out to be. It's by no means 100% successful but insinuating that people should drop out if they don't succeed in getting Big Law as a 2L is, in my opinion, kind of ridiculous.

Your 60K figure is also a bit misguided. The 2L public sector positions I apply for will not pay during next summer. But, starting salaries at many DA and PD gigs in CA and across the country are more than 60K. We also (at least currently) have IBR and LRAP on our side.

Bottom lines: Legal employment is not anywhere close to its pinnacle. But, there is still hope, as 9:48 and other factors have clearly indicated.

8/18/2011 10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Your mom +

8/19/2011 9:09 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2L here, but I just wanted to reach out to 3Ls and say that there is still a chance of high paying jobs. I reached out to a number of firms in my secondary market that said they were only hiring 3Ls and if I didn't have a job next year to get in touch.

The bottom line is that some firms don't want the risk of a summer program. Some firms only hire after clerkships (so apply to some magistrates now). There are limited ways.

40% is pessimistic, 60k is pessimistic, and "last chance ever" is certainly pessimistic. If you aren't picky about location, I suggest mass mailing secondary and tertiary markets for the 100-120k jobs they offer.

8/19/2011 9:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i'm finishing the jd and a graduate degree in 2012. but considering the market for 3Ls, i decided to extend filing my grad degree to 2013 and applied for summer positions for 2012 as a 2L in effect. got two call backs (with median grades). if i get a job, i'll try to fill the time after the 2012 summer by taking the bar in feb. i'll also explore a haas if they take me and gives me the mba in my one extra year after boalt. think creatively folks.

8/19/2011 11:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's by no means 100% successful but insinuating that people should drop out if they don't succeed in getting Big Law as a 2L is, in my opinion, kind of ridiculous."

I don't think it's ridiculous. It depends on what people want. If they particularly wanted to do, say, transactional work at a big corporate law firm, well, missing the boat at 2L OCI greatly reduces the likelihood of that (at least in the near term).

I think people are oversensitive about criticisms of the value of a Boalt (or generally, top 10 law school) legal education -- they take it personally or something. I dunno.

I personally regard my legal education, and, to be frank, my also-overpriced undergrad education, as huge mistakes. I'm only finishing up the degree because, while I regard it as a colossal waste of time and money, the marginal cost at this point (as a 3L), despite being rather massive (50k tuition and a year of opportunity cost), is less than the return I think I'll get on it. So, while I *certainly* would not do it again, I think it's rational for me to finish it up now. It is what it is, and despite being a mistake, it still has *some* value. *shrug*

But you can bet I'm screaming from the rooftops telling people not to go to law school outside of a very few narrow circumstances (like, their parents will pay, they got a full-ride, they are super-passionate about public interest, or they got into Yale). Most people don't listen though....

8/19/2011 5:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with 5:08. If you don't get your foot in the door during your 2L summer, you have a slim chance of starting in BigLaw. Sure, you may be able to find a small firm, get some experience, and lateral into a big firm, but the likelihood that you will start there is very small.

As a recent graduate who didn't even get a summer associate position after 2L summer, I can tell you that trying to find a job in BigLaw as a 3L is difficult. Some firms will interview 3Ls, but they aren't many and it's tough.

Many firms I looked at during my 3L search told me that they aren't even looking at 3Ls. Maybe it was the economy, but it's tough.

Hate to admit it, but if you want to go into BigLaw from the get go, you have to succeed during OCIP/EIW.

8/19/2011 6:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Or right after through CDO and job listings. I didn't get a single callback at OCI, but I did read an email from CDO in mid October saying a firm had underhired and I sent off my info that day. They called 2 days later, I interviewed less than a week later, and I had secured my summer spot a week after that.

8/20/2011 7:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Congrats 7:25 but If your implication is that that's a realistic scenario for 3Ls, rather than an anecdote about how you basically won the lotto, you are sadly mistaken.

Doc review or moving home with the parents is going to be a way more common outcome for currently unemployed 3Ls than some firm job coming their way mid-semester.

8/20/2011 9:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agree with 9:26, call backs are not a measure of self worth but are a good proxy for your desirability in the legal market. Jobs such as gov and pi are not fall backs and usually require even higher qualifications than normal legal jobs.

Even as a 2l who struck out, with a few callbacks, it took me 8 months of work (an hour each day), to find a volunteer summer position. Now private sector employers grill me as being a public interest person.

The reality is that in a year I will most likely be 1) doc reviewing 2) at home doing nothing 3) "employed" (receiving our schools grant while volunteering somewhere for a few months before being at 1 or 2.)

I also was an optimistic 2l but later found my optimism unfounded.

8/21/2011 6:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I agree with 6:48 that government and PI jobs are definitely not fall back plans if you strike out during OCIP. Each of those require a high level of demonstrated interest and commitment that can't be feigned since they are hundreds of other candidates who went to law school for the purpose of securing those positions.

8/21/2011 11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've retooled somewhat for public interest, even though it wasn't why I came to law school. It's annoying though. For my niche, I'd probably have to move somewhere I don't really want to live if I want a legal job.

I know you're supposed to be flexible and everything, but seriously, if I'd wanted a degree where the best case scenario was having few to no employment prospects, except perhaps in places I don't really want to live, for wages that are less than a year of loans to go to this place, and on a career path I'm not particular excited about, I would have gotten a PhD! :P

8/21/2011 11:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is it too late to still expect call backs?

8/23/2011 4:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you see that other students are reporting dings from a firm that you interviewed with during OCI, and if you didn't get a ding, then there's a chance that you'll still get a callback from that firm. It likely means that you didn't make the first cut but that the firm could still call you back after finishing its OCIs at other schools. It's kinda like applying to law school and being put on a waitlist. You aren't likely to get a callback, but you at least have an outside shot.

8/23/2011 7:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seems like people are not posting their -

Here are some

Davis Polk NY-
Goodwin Boston -
Wachtell -
Simpson T NY -
Fox NY -

8/23/2011 7:23 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

7:23, thanks for the stats. I assume "Fox" is Arent Fox, but me know if that is incorrect.

8/23/2011 7:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3L here. Had multiple callbacks and offers last year. Went with a firm I thought was a good fit. Got no-offered today. I wasn't the only one and of the 30+ people in the class I don't know how many got no-offered. I've only spoken with one colleague/friend since and she already knew 3 other people who were no-offered. The firm probably f**king over-hired and seems to be no-offering a bunch of us (all T-14 people too). I had great reviews and partners kept telling me to choose their practice groups while I was there.

Shit. Can't even go for 3LOLCI at this point.

Be warned 2L's. Chose wisely. And even when you do, you never know. These law firms do not owe you any allegiance. Swim or sink or have your leg chomped on (by the sharks).

8/23/2011 8:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well 8:52 if you did well enough to get multiple callbacks last year maybe you can do a rush clerkship application or something.

8/23/2011 9:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:52, it's your fault for not exploring your options without a formal offer, now it's too late for clerkship and 3L OCI (which had many firms looking for candidates from other big firms specifically).

Good lesson for 2Ls though, continually explore options until you have an offer in hand. His/her decision to be lazy probably cost a chance at post graduate employment.

8/24/2011 7:41 AM  
Blogger Patrick said...

That’s some tough love, 7:41. Mind if I disagree?

It’s not 8:52’s fault that the economy is stagnant, nor is it 8:52’s fault that his or her law firm misled its summer class about the firm’s hiring needs. (And for the record, yes, it is misleading—at best—for a firm to hire a summer class with the understanding that the hirees have a meaningful shot at a job, send that message all summer, and then turn around and no-offer the bulk of them.) I agree that there are things 8:52 could have done to hedge the risk of a no-offer, but is it realistic to expect a person to solicit other employers while in the middle of a summer associate gig? I doubt many if any Boalties do so. Most people I know would rather focus their energy on the summer associateship they chose than divide it between pleasing their current hiring partner while conducting covert communications with the firm across the street. Further, most employers I know look askance at someone who sending a clear “loyalty isn’t a high priority vibe.”

Put it this way: If a student was no-offered because his or her current firm got wind from its buddies that the student was sending applications out during the last half of the summer, wouldn’t you say the no-offer was that student’s “fault”? If you answered “yes,” then people like 8:52 are at fault no matter what they do. I don’t buy it.

8/24/2011 8:32 AM  
Blogger Patrick said...

(And as for clerkships as a general prescription fallback plan, that’s just silly. First, because clerkships are a total crapshoot for all but the three or so true rock stars in any given class—I know this having applied for clerkships and having hired clerks for my judge—and second because those very few students with grades and credentials such that they can legitimately rely on being hired by a judge are also the students least likely to be no-offered. Nobody—nobody—should treat clerkships as a fallback plan; that’s like trying to make up a loss by taking an even riskier bet. Anyone who does so truly is at “fault” should they end up unemployed.)

8/24/2011 8:39 AM  
Blogger Matt said...

I'm absolutely, 100 percent with Patrick on the idea of hedging and looking for other jobs while a summer associate. (As background, in 2009 I worked in a summer class of about 40, and 15 offers were extended; none to me. Not that that is at all relevant to what I'm about to say - I just wanted to make clear that I've been there.)

The real problem with looking for other work - particularly in the same market - is that lawyers talk to each other. You don't want the lawyer at the firm across the street calling the friend or former classmate that works in your firm about your resume sitting on the desk. It pretty much kills your chances at both firms.

8/24/2011 8:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't want to pile on 8:52 — I really feel for him/her — but isn't there a middle ground between actively seeking employment in the middle of the summer and doing nothing? Couldn't one (quietly) participate in 3L OCI at the end of one's summer without offending one's current employer?

8/24/2011 12:38 PM  
Anonymous boalt '06 said...

Patrick--seriously? What happened to 8:52 pm really sucks. But I don't think you can blame the law firm 100%.

Right now, law firms are asked to determine their needs for the fall of 2013 by August 2011. Many many things could happen between now and then. And even the most consciencious law firm can be overly optimistic about hiring at times. Should they no offer folks who are otherwise good associate material? I don't think so--I suspect a deferral would be preferable to a no-offer.

But the constant pushing back of OCI earlier and earlier does not make it easier for law firms to guess how many associates it will need over two years from now.

8/24/2011 12:49 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Boalt ‘06,

I agree that the early OCI processes is unfair to firms and to students, and that it is unrealistic to expect firms to commit to students at OCI, a full two years before the student will come on board as an attorney. It’s a stupid, stupid corner that law school career development programs have backed everyone into.

But I disagree with how you interpret my comment. I did not say it was the law firm’s fault. In fact, what I said had nothing at all to do with “fault” of law firms. What I said had to do with misleading students by sending mixed messages: “it is misleading--at best--for a firm to hire a summer class with the understanding that the hirees have a meaningful shot at a job, send that message all summer, and then turn around and no-offer the bulk of them.” What’s wrong with my conclusion? I mean, how is that not misleading? To the extent you may to argue that it isn’t fair of me to demand that firms make ironclad representations at this early stage, because firms can’t know their needs two years out, you’re right. But that only reinforces my point: it’s misleading for a firm that is uncertain about its needs to say or imply otherwise. And that sounds like it is exactly what happened to 8:52. It may not be the case that it is the law firm’s fault that 8:52 is scrambling for a job, but it is the case that the firm (inadvertently, clumsily, obliviously, otherwise) misled him or her.

What the firm should have said is, “times are tough, we don’t know our hiring needs, I wish we could make you a promise right now, let’s talk at the end of the summer, etc.” Not, “things are peachy, come work in my practice group.”

A firm KNOWS that students are reading between the lines on this stuff, and it KNOWS that the reason students come to work there is because the student wants a post law school job. What’s so hard about being straight up about any uncertainty surrounding hiring needs? And what’s so justified about being opaque when a firm knows that a student is hanging on every work?

8/24/2011 1:09 PM  
Blogger Patrick said...

Um, sorry, '06. That comment was far fierier than was fair. I just re-read your comment and I think we are both right. Your position is that it's unreasonable to expect firms to be confident about unknowable future events, and my position is that firms shouldn't represent otherwise. We probably are 100% in agreement with each other on each.

8/24/2011 1:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:52 here. I don't blame the firm 100%. But it is really suspicious that they no-offered around 30% of the class and the only reason they gave me was how I was not a good fit. And as Patrick said, it's misleading to say stuff like "don't worry about it, anyone who wants an offer gets one" or "you'll do fine" or "everyone likes you" or "excellent job" or "you should really think about joining my X practice group" during formal and informal reviews and then no-offer you over the phone with an awkward and cold "you are not a good fit for us." If it was just me, then I would take it seriously - that I really screwed it up somehow. I am probably to blame quite a bit (70% of the class got offers so why didn't I make it?). But I suspect there were other things at play, things beyond my control.

As to those who claim I was lazy and should have done 3L OCI etc. well, it's easy to think "if only 8:52 had done more s/he would not be in this position." But the thing is how much more effort does one need to put into all this? I busted my ass last year OCI, spent considerable amount of time doing informational interviews preparing etc. Then it was 12 weeks of SA out of state, which came with finding a place to live, looking up stuff for spouse (I'm married) the list goes on. And my SA went past the beginning of OCI or EIW or whatever the hell they call it nowadays. Also, the SA wasn't all models and bottles. I regularly pulled 10 hour work days plus social events. Admittedly, no weekends though.

I am not here to discuss my individual situation. Just wanted 2L's to realize that getting an offer is not the end. Keep this perspective. Good luck.

8/24/2011 1:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You really think ten hour days are long, and that meeting with firms for twenty minutes is a lot of work? Well it's becoming clear why you got no offered.

8/24/2011 3:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

@3:59 - I do not think it is necessary to make unwarranted obnoxious remarks. We all know 10 hour days as a summer is a lot (obviously when you are an associate it is a different story altogether -- but not relevant to this posting). Also, the person was probably not only referring to the twenty minute interviews, but the endless call backs, thank you notes, research ... the list goes on. For someone to deny that the process is a lot of work and that it is a challenging process is to be delusional. I really feel for 8:52 and I hope that you find something -- if you read some of the comments above it looks like secondary markets are looking to hire 3Ls. Best of luck and don't let anonymous posters tell you that you didn't work hard enough or that it is your fault. At the end of the day you did the best you could, and you are in a bad situation. Just try to make the best of it and keep looking!!

8/24/2011 6:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:52 again, to 3:59 above - no, I'm not saying that's a lot of work. I've worked longer hours before law school. But it is quite a bit of work. And let's not start posturing and shit like that ["ha! look at this wuss who can't even pull one all-nighter and s/he wants to do biglaw"]. All I'm saying is that it is easy to call people who can't get jobs or get no-offered or whatever lazy. You might be a superman or superwoman who can regularly pull 50 hour workweeks, hit the gym regularly, party hard, juggle relationships with weeknights/weekend firm events and whatever, and still have enough time, motivation, and energy to look for jobs on the side. I'm not. No wonder I got no offered. More power to you. But whatever the reasons why I got no-offered, I will have to deal with the aftermath, not you. You will meet your type in biglaw. You know, the real hard workers. My type won't be there. Us wusses get weeded out. All those who get weeded out are lazy and/or don't want to put in the hours.

But let's not go down this route. I'm posting here just to share my story. Enough with meaningless attacks, straw man fallacies, and easy theories ("well it's becoming clear...") to explain away shit that happens in life.

Good luck to 3:59. I retire.

8/24/2011 6:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Non-EIW callbacks:

Skadden, DC+
Willkie, DC+

8/25/2011 2:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wise ones:

if we haven't received a callback at this stage (and haven't received a ding via snail or e-mail, is it safe to assume that the cb ship has sailed? Or is it still possible, given the early EIW schedule?

Any informed insight would be helpful!

8/28/2011 8:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 8:22pm:

I recently talked to CDO about whether there's still chance for callbacks. They said that the firms have extended the first round of callback interviews. But since the firms are competing with each other for the strong candidates, they'll go to the next round of callbacks once the strong candidates reject the 4 out of the 5 offers that they get. If you got a couple of callbacks in the first round, then you're a desirable candidate and it's likely that you'll get some more callbacks in the second round. Conversely, if you got no callbacks in the first round, you are a less desirable candidate and it's less likely (but still possible) that you'll get a callback in the second round. I had two callbacks during the EIW and the CDO was reasonably confident that I'll get more. So far, nada.

Callbacks or no callbacks, keep doing your job search until you have an offer.

8/29/2011 4:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In theory, you're in a waitlist somewhere until you get a rejection. I got rejections for half the EIW interviews. So the glass is half full.

8/29/2011 4:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone hear back from the following:

Hogan, DC
Jones Day, DC

Any dings or callbacks?

8/29/2011 9:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

3l here, there is no such thing as a second round and cdo was also confident I'd get more but I got nothing. Many of the firms I did cbs with invited 40 people for 2 spots... So theres a lot of strong candidates who have to say no for you to have a second round.

8/29/2011 10:14 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hogan DC has extended callbacks

8/29/2011 4:12 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

4:12, I read your comment as "I have heard that..." Therefore, I'm not adding it to the main page. If I'm wrong, let me know.

Also, you all should not be shy about requesting a bump for this post.

8/29/2011 7:44 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

As in, you as the consumer of this information are in a better position to judge whether and when this post should be bumped.

8/29/2011 7:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Armen 7:44,

Why not get with program and contraction-ize "you all" to "y'all"? Best contraction ever. The South wins on this one.

8/29/2011 8:14 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

Actually farther* south wins on that one. The whole ustedes thing makes simple grammatical sense. Then again, THE South is xenophobic about such things.

*Shout out to Finding Forrester fans.

8/29/2011 8:18 PM  
Blogger Armen said...

As an aside, you should contract contraction-ize to contract.

And I'm not sure what "Armen 7:44" means. My identity remains the same regardless of the time of my post--unlike you, shape-shifting Anonymous.

8/29/2011 8:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Two Comments:

First, this post should be bumped.

Second, I know of a few students who check this post at least once a day but who won't submit their own info for fear of being "found out." I think this is ridiculous. If you benefit from reading the statuses of others' callbacks/dings, then you should contribute your own information. Even in the unlikely event that someone at your prospective firm (1) actually reads this thread and (2) somehow manages to figure out that it was you who submitted their callback or ding, what possible effect could it have on your chances for getting an offer? Seriously, people, make your contribution and improve the quality of information that is available to your fellow students.

8/29/2011 11:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:59's comment is seconded.

8/30/2011 5:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lieff cabraser sf - (several days ago)

8/30/2011 8:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So when are folks going to start posting callback/offer details? Is this appropriate? The post-callback waiting is wearing on me (as I'm sure it is for many others).

8/30/2011 11:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've generally gotten offers about a week after the callbacks. Some have come at 5 days, some at 8. The fastest was getting an offer the day after the callback. Generally I'd say it should be around a week.

8/30/2011 12:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What's the protocol for informing a firm that's your top choice of another offer before they've decided? It's been a week since my callback. Will firms make a decision faster if you tell them you're sitting on an offer?

Any info from alumns and knowledge of hiring would be especially helpful.

9/01/2011 12:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perkins Coie, SEA, -

9/01/2011 1:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know of one firm that explicitly asks that you inform them of your earliest offer deadline. I doubt you can speed up the process unless you're genuinely concerned the 28 days will expire.

9/01/2011 2:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:31 - At my most recent callback, the firm straight-up asked me if I had any offers yet, from whom and when they would expire. So I told them.

Separately, I called one firm to ask if they knew when they'd be making a decision because they were my first choice, but I had a handful of offers that would begin expiring relatively soon. They promptly called to relieve me of that anxiety with a very polite rejection.

11:44 - Most firms have gotten back to me post-callback pretty quickly (anywhere between a day and week), some with good news, some with bad. But the longest wait was a few days short of three weeks.

Hope that's helpful...

Also:
Fenwick, SV, - (non-OCI)
Morgan Lewis, SF, - (non-OCI)
Freshfields -
Fish & Richardson, SV, -

9/01/2011 4:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anyone hear back from MoFo DC or NY?

9/02/2011 9:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:31 - A week after my callback with a firm, I called their recruiting rep and was told that my candidacy was being evaluated by a specific practice group, and so it would take longer than the usual 1-week response. Told them about my outstanding offer but no word yet. Doesn't seem to hurt to check in with them. GL.

9/02/2011 9:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ropes & Gray, SF -

9/03/2011 12:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

K&L Gates, OC-

9/04/2011 10:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:31- At OCI two years ago I had success calling my top choice firm and telling them I had an offer elsewhere that was soon to be expiring. The HR person at my favored firm made the offer while I was still on the phone.

9/05/2011 10:34 PM  
Blogger M.L.U. said...

Hey Boalties. Class of '11 member here. I may catch some flack for this post, but if there is just one person out there who maintains their optimism because of it, then all the flack is worth it.

Some background info: I was a transfer student. And not from a top school. It was less than mediocre, at best.

Translation: You think OCIP (EIW?) sucks as an original Boaltie? Try it as a transfer student. Big Law looks at your resume like, "Really? Is this a joke? Where's Ashton?"

But thus my heart wanted Big Law.

I had 15 interviews during OCIP and received only one callback. And that one callback was the only non-Big Law firm on my interview docket. It was, in fact, a small firm located in the town of my former law school that randomly sent a Boalt alum to OCIP that year.

Fast forward a year. I ended up taking a Summer Associate job at a regional firm in Sacramento (I got this job by applying separately from OCIP - this firm didn't do OCIPs at Berkeley that year). Regional = $100k/year salary instead of the Big Law $160k. I was content with this. It was something. $100k > $0, after all.

And then I got married. And my husband and I relocated to Dallas immediately after graduation. So my summer job meant nothing. I was back to $0.

So, beginning in the fall of my 3L year, I emailed my resume out to every Big Law firm in the Dallas area. Mind you, this is weeks after summer programs have ended and offers have been made and (mostly) all accepted.

I got a lot of "We have no need for you, but good luck" emails. But then . . . K&L Gates responded positively. I got an interview. And then Jones Day responded positively too. Another interview. I ended up with offers from both firms - in February of this year, just three months before graduation but months after both firms completed their summer programs. I lucked out because both firms had under-hired.

I'm not trying to brag, but what I'm saying is this: Be relentless. OCIP sucks. Not everyone will get callbacks and summer jobs and permanent jobs post-graduation. In some ways, it's all a big crapshoot. But I read an earlier post saying that if you don't get Big Law after 2L, you'll never get Big Law. I debunked that myth. I got Big Law three months before graduation. Sure, going out of the Bay area helped. I was fortunate that I moved to Dallas and not NY or Boston. Dallas has the big legal market with the same salaries as SF and NY, but Dallas isn't surrounded by a ton of top law schools. Because of that, my Berkeley degree made a difference.

Anyway. To all of you 2Ls out there (and 3Ls) who don't yet have summer or post-grad employment, don't lose hope. Don't drop out (unless you really want to). And don't give up. Seriously pimp out your resume as much as possible. Send it to everyone.

You can only go up from here.

9/08/2011 2:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MLU,
You're awesome! Thanks for the positive post!

9/08/2011 11:39 PM  
Blogger Jackie O said...

I have no interest in big law but 2:22 made me feel like I could do it! And like I could land a commercial airplane or be an olympic gymnast or an astronaut. Good work 2:22.

9/08/2011 11:46 PM  
Blogger M.L.U. said...

Hahaha. You go on and fly that airplane to the Olympics, Jackie O. =) I didn't mean to sound all motivational coach-like; just trying to give some positive vibes since this post is mostly negative . . . When I was going through OCIPs, I read this blog every single day (and would also freak out every single day when my phone didn't ring with a callback). It's hard to not get negged out.

Here's another piece of advice: Even after my initial interview and callbacks, I kept in touch with whatever lawyer it was I had met with. I let them know every few days that I was *very, very* interested in their firm. Say it in whatever way you need to. I even told one attorney that I was going to hire a plane to fly a banner over his office, stating that he should hire me. (Something like that.) Yea, it's really cheesy, but it worked. Firms don't want to make offers to people who might not want the job. They don't like rejection either. Try it. Really, what does anyone have to lose at this point?

9/09/2011 7:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Nice try CDO

9/09/2011 1:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just wanted to say MLU is awesome!

9/09/2011 5:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm sure The Secret had a lot to do with MLU's success.

9/10/2011 1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cadwalader, DC- (snailmail dated 8/29/11)

9/10/2011 5:20 PM  
Blogger M.L.U. said...

Is 1:41 calling me CDO? As if I'm posing as the CDO? No no.

9/11/2011 1:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anybody got a ding yet from K&E SF?

9/11/2011 4:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anyone know what is the ratio of callbacks/offers? I feel like I must be bombing my callbacks...

9/13/2011 11:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I ran a quick analysis of the CDO data, and it's roughly 50/50, with quite a bit of variation depending on the firm.

9/13/2011 12:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jones Day, DC-; email on 9/15

9/17/2011 2:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Federal Reserve Board, DC+ (yes, they're slow)

11/07/2011 1:56 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home