Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

The Better Candidate

Two people came for an interview. One person clearly had the nighthawk05/25/17
I guess it comes down the type of practice you have. The st ejs201705/25/17
Trick question! Neither. A recruiter pushed a 3rd candida isthisit05/25/17
The female because she's good looking? Bad joke. Don't jd4hire05/25/17
Lol but in my experience, the opposite is true... been told msbilliejo06/05/17
Weaker candidate? It makes sense, speech patterns are a mark wolfman05/25/17
I would hope the weaker candidate, otherwise what's the poin bingojackson05/25/17
reminds me of lawl school: top 10%, Law Review, Moot Cour dingbat05/25/17
This was like me. After 1L I came in within the top 10 peopl onehell05/26/17
"acted working class" lol sjlawyer05/26/17
Stronger candidate won since Law is all about what attorney' irishlaw05/25/17
I strongly disagree. Many partners would be afraid to let " dingbat05/26/17
OP never stops delivering scorn upon the law losers. triplesix05/26/17
He is my better. Gonna run and get my shinebox. vohod05/26/17
So who actually got the job OP? irishlaw05/26/17
Reminds me of my experience. I was hired as an associate at junkwired05/26/17
it means 50-100. the historical tiers used to be 1-50, 50-10 wolfman05/26/17
IMo, there's T14, then "primary school in secondary market o dingbat05/26/17
^TITCR...T25 or T50 as concepts are nonsense themapmaster05/27/17
Oh, I agree with that; in fact I'd argue that school rank ma wolfman05/27/17
Everyone interested in law look at OP and his body of work. vohod06/06/17

nighthawk (May 25, 2017 - 4:28 pm)

Two people came for an interview. One person clearly had the better credentials and, based strictly on the resumes, which a far better candidate.

The relatively weaker candidate interviewed first. Made a strong impression, sounded knowledgeable, acted professionally, and very eager to be there and show what he can do. Great interview skills, very intriguing. T2 school, no honors, not on journal, good but not great experience.

Next came the relatively stronger candidate. Clerked for a circuit court judge, four years in biglaw, two years in high-end boutique. Good personality, knowledgeable, very bright. She continually started sentences with "ya know" and "like." Annoying, especially for an interview. Not every sentence is ya know, I don't know, like, whatever, I mean etc.

Guess who got the job:

Reply Like (0)
ejs2017 (May 25, 2017 - 5:33 pm)

I guess it comes down the type of practice you have. The stronger one has the academic credentials but not necessarily the personality that a litigation-type firm may require. I've been in that position as the hiring person at a litigation firm. In the end, it comes down to who which one will be more effective for your type of business. If it were me, I would probably go with the "weaker" one.

Reply Like (0)
isthisit (May 25, 2017 - 4:30 pm)

Trick question! Neither.

A recruiter pushed a 3rd candidate who would do the job for half the cost, no bennies, and in 6 mo intervals.

Reply Like (0)
jd4hire (May 25, 2017 - 4:40 pm)

The female because she's good looking?

Bad joke. Don't want to end up on CNN like the Alaska rep...

Reply Like (0)
msbilliejo (Jun 5, 2017 - 8:11 pm)

Lol but in my experience, the opposite is true... been told multiple times job is yours only to be called back the next day to be told that the lawyer's wife wouldn't let them hire me. If one of reasons they hire you is bc you're considered "pretty" you can count on being totally sexually harassed! I bet he hired the less qualified guy... especially if he is married.

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (May 25, 2017 - 4:42 pm)

Weaker candidate? It makes sense, speech patterns are a mark of class, and class is important in BigLaw; also, you are going to be around this person for like 16+ hours a day, do you really wanna to listen to her annoying speech ticks all the time?

Reply Like (0)
bingojackson (May 25, 2017 - 4:52 pm)

I would hope the weaker candidate, otherwise what's the point of interviewing? presumably both were qualified on paper which is why they were interviewed in the first place. the whole point of the interview is to see how presentable they are in person. easy answer...

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (May 25, 2017 - 5:06 pm)

reminds me of lawl school:

top 10%, Law Review, Moot Court. Looked and acted working class. Lots of interviews, no callbacks.
top 25%, no journal, no moot court. Looked and acted like the well-to-do person he was. few interviews, most gave callbacks, multiple offers

Reply Like (0)
onehell (May 26, 2017 - 2:10 pm)

This was like me. After 1L I came in within the top 10 people (not even top 10%, top 10 people, so actually more like top 3%) at a school in the USNWR 15-20 range.

I had tons of interviews, but I came from a very working-class background and there were no other lawyers (or any professionals really) in my family or social circles to that point. I had no clue about the unwritten rules. I'd never worn a suit before so I had some ill-fitting jet-black thing that I shudder to think about now. I didn't even know you were supposed to get the things tailored. No one I knew growing up had ever owned a suit, much less worn one on a regular basis.

I didn't own a briefcase and I had classes before and after interviews, and I figured hey, it's on-campus interviews, they know they're interviewing students. So it didn't even cross my mind that it might be a faux pas to walk into a biglaw interview with a backpack full of those heavy hard-cover textbooks.

So even though I got an interview pretty much everywhere and anywhere I put in Symplicity, I only got like 2 callbacks and no offers. Things worked out alright in the end but it took a long time and to this day 10+ years later, I wonder how different my life might have been if I'd had the kind of upbringing where the first time you've ever worn a suit or tied a tie isn't 2L OCI.

Reply Like (1)
sjlawyer (May 26, 2017 - 5:36 pm)

"acted working class" lol

Reply Like (0)
irishlaw (May 25, 2017 - 7:03 pm)

Stronger candidate won since Law is all about what attorney's you can show off on your firm's website to justify higher billing.

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (May 26, 2017 - 8:53 am)

I strongly disagree. Many partners would be afraid to let "stronger candidate" anywhere near a client. Polished associates are more preferable

Reply Like (0)
triplesix (May 26, 2017 - 8:58 am)

OP never stops delivering scorn upon the law losers.

Reply Like (0)
vohod (May 26, 2017 - 10:33 am)

He is my better. Gonna run and get my shinebox.

Reply Like (0)
irishlaw (May 26, 2017 - 10:41 am)

So who actually got the job OP?

Reply Like (0)
junkwired (May 26, 2017 - 2:52 pm)

Reminds me of my experience. I was hired as an associate at my first firm because the partner liked me. I was on a journal, but it was secondary. My school was okay but not a T14, and my GPA was decent but not quite honors. Apparently other candidates on paper had superior credentials but they were "weird", or the hiring partner had other reservations about their personalities. Also, the associate I worked with was nearly top of her class, but was told that she was "only hired because of her grades."

Also, when people say T2 now does it mean top 50-100, or a range after top 100?

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (May 26, 2017 - 3:22 pm)

it means 50-100. the historical tiers used to be 1-50, 50-100, over 100... and unranked (T4), I believe... it was before my time

Reply Like (0)
dingbat (May 26, 2017 - 10:58 pm)

IMo, there's T14, then "primary school in secondary market or secondary school in primary market", followed by crud schools, and ultimately "your degree is worth less than toilet paper"

Reply Like (0)
themapmaster (May 27, 2017 - 11:48 am)

^TITCR...T25 or T50 as concepts are nonsense

Reply Like (0)
wolfman (May 27, 2017 - 2:05 pm)

Oh, I agree with that; in fact I'd argue that school rank matters little outside of the T6 v. non-T6 and notorious joke of a school (we're talking Charlotte or Cooley-caliber here) vs. all others... I was just telling the OP what the terms mean.

Reply Like (0)
vohod (Jun 6, 2017 - 12:30 am)

Everyone interested in law look at OP and his body of work. This is the personality type that goes beyond 3 years experience in most areas of law. Caveat emptor.

Reply Like (0)
Post a message in this thread