First!

Never lump DePaul and Illinois together again!

Cosi is gross

I'm all for skipping call back lunches. They were my least favorite part of the call back process.

as an interviewee...it depended. i liked when i was sent on callback lunches with younger associates. most firms i called-back with last year sent me out with two young associates, and that was fun.

but...one firm sent me out with one older partner, and that was it. they knew i was into lit, and he was corporate. that was...a bad match.

I occasionally scan the comments on this site to remind myself how generally smug and pompous most other lawyers (and law students) are. When i have a bad day, it's nice to remember that there are others who are destined to burn in hell for eternity.

Get your collective heads out of your asses. I hope you've all realized by now that neither the caliber of an attorney or the amount he or she makes is more than remotely correlated with the U.S. News score.

I quit high school (I swear) went to T-2 and now earn 200K net in my own office where I generally work 9-5.

The problem for associates going on these is that these lunches can go on forever - usually 2 hours - and who has the time in the middle of the day for this? Then it becomes awkward when you have to start checking your blackberry every 2 seconds while simultaneously telling the interviewee "nah...we're not slaves here"

This was a not-so-subtle attempt to troll against Illinois. Someone's upset they didn't get in.

That's classless.

So, a while back ATL uses a photo of an African woman as an icon for a discussion of breastfeeding. Now, they use a photo of a poor Central or South American girl to depict dumb law students.

How much insensitivity must ATL readers' bear!

Congrats to Morgan Lewis Bockius on responding to Lat's question! It just shows that not all firm PR people are douches. To the contrary for Atkin Gump.

I never found the lunch to be a particularly helpful or enjoyable part of the callback interview (except for the 2 Shearman & Sterling associates who spent much of the time telling me how miserable they were, which I took to be a clear signal not to accept an offer from S&S), but the Cosi card is just offensive. Better to just not have lunch.

The firm-wide head of recruiting at a top five firm told me that lunch is where the vast majority of interviewees lose their offer. The gift certificate means you won't go hungry (esp. important if you travelled for the interview), but you also won't risk blowing it. Maybe Cosi is cheap, but the idea is a good one.

2:49,

I share your concern, but I doubt that very many poor Central American kids read this blog, so they're unlikely to be offended at having been compared to a Tier 2 student.

My favorite part of callback lunches is when the clueless 2Ls don't realize they are still being interviewed. It makes for good stories.

anon 2:55: cheap? really? it's tasty...but it's so overpriced.

rofl @ this story

Nothing is almost better than a Cosi giftcard. At least then you can get a decent lunch on your own and probably submit it for reimbursement with your other travel expenses.

237 -

No kidding. They both suck, but at least DePaul is in Chicago. Doosh-baiig-zuh.

I had a call back lunch with a Chicago firm at the Millenium Park Grill (which is pretty good, but not exactly of the caliber expected for a call back lunch.) It was Oktober Fest. An oom-pah band played literally ten feet away from us.

Would it be gauche to just give cash, instead of the gift card?

I'm a Tier 2 grad. When I was interviewing a few years ago, I didn't get lunch at Cahill, Cadwalader or Paul Weiss. I don't know if those firms typically include lunch, and I could take or leave that part of the callback. But, if there was no lunch because I was Tier 2, that is obnoxious.

I find it hard to believe that a v100 firm would risk such awful PR to save a few grand a season. I call BS.

as an associate, i'll take a free lunch at a nice place any time. also, 2:56 is dead on. you find out more about a candidate at lunch than in an interview. if the person can't hold a decent conversation with a few relatively outgoing young associates, we probably don't want to work with 'em.

True.

I interviewed with several elite firms that did not take me to lunch (lowly 2nd tier grad that I am).

Anyway I ultimately accepted an offer from one and I am now making the same money as my "good school" classmates, so I don't care about the missed lunch.

When I was going on callbacks a few years back, 3 firms didn't do lunches with me - MoFo and Bryan Cave. The others did. I have to say, I did feel a little cheated when they didn't take me out, but at the same time felt relieved to be leaving the whole interview process.

In my view, there's relatively little to be gained for the candidate at the callback lunch. For instance, at my Cadwalader lunch, the 2 associates got stinking drunk on Remy VSOP at 12 pm. Not only that, but they spent 1/2 the lunch drinking and I was torn as to whether I should abstain in case it was a test or indulge so I didn't appear prudish.

The whole process is crap. I propose some sort of Mad Max thunderdome death match instead. It's much more civil.

"I hope you've all realized by now that neither the caliber of an attorney or the amount he or she makes is more than remotely correlated with the U.S. News score. "

Um, amount of money attorney makes only remotely correlated with U.S. News?

the above comment should, of course, say, "2 firms didn't do lunches..."

i'd like to add that the spazzes i lunched with at kelley drye made the firm's rejection of me much more palatable.

Not the original poster, but yes clueless one, there are plenty of attorneys making big money, and most of them did it by hard work, not by sucking up to other suckups and browsing blogs all day until one day, six or seven years hence, they get bounced out on their asses.

Call-back lunches are awkward - I tried to avoid them by scheduling afternoon interviews.

Morgan Lewis' answer is true of most firms. It usually does depend on time of day & availability. It's not a school rank thing otherwise they wouldn't even bother interviewing the candidate.

"there are plenty of attorneys making big money, and most of them did it by hard work"

I'm not quite clear on how this supports the assertion that there's only a remote correlation between school rank. This might be because I'm really stupid. Who knows.

I think callback lunches for summers at biglaw firms are a waste of time. It doesn't matter what the applicant says at lunch or whether you like them, if they have a top law school on their resume they're getting an offer anyway, so why waste the associate's time?

FIRST!

I went to a Tier 2 school and, come to think of it, all my call backs were in the afternoon (i.e., after lunch). Never thought much of it until now..... I got offers everywhere, so maybe there wasn't much to it.

Akin Gump is super cheap, so nothing would surprise me.

3:37 should read "between school rank, attorney income. Again, I'm not very bright. Apologies to all concerned parties.

I had a call back dinner (Seattle firm) that went for five hours. We had cocktails, eight courses, and drank four bottles of wine between the three of us. It was a good time, particularly toward the end.

Heller (SoCal) sent me to lunch with two older patent prosecutors, and it was incredibly painful. I was interested in litigation, had no interest in IP, and the patent lawyers were about as interesting and outgoing as one might expect (I don't doubt that there are some cool patent people, but those two fit the stereotype).

I heart Morgan Lewis Chicago!

As a lateral interviewee in DC I hated when firms tried to take me to call back lunches. 90% of the city's law firms are in a 5-block radius. Let's go on an interview lunch and see how many colleagues we can run into. It was bad enough that I interviewed at 2 firms across the street from my old firm. And could see my colleagues from the window.

My office (100ish lawyers in NY, not main office) recently dropped the callback lunch. I asked why, and was told that a) in a small office, it's just too hard to get 2 attorneys to every single lunch given the number of interviewees, and b) feedback was that they sucked for the interviewees.

I am a 3L at University at Buffalo Law and when I interviewed last year in both New York and Boston, I was taken out to lunch each time. A quick survey of everyone else I know that interviewed at Biglaw firms indicates that not a single one of them has ever not been taken out to lunch. This idea is just absurd.

Illinois is a Tier 1 school...pretty comfortably.

Have fun using that Tier 1 degree in Urbana or Decatur or Effingham.

Chicago to The Cheesecake Factory!!!

I have an interview this fall that includes a callback lunch and a callback dinner.

in my experience, tier 2 and lower law students are extremely insecure about their pedigree and they seem to think that any deviation in recruiting that they experience is due to the fact that they attend a lower ranked school.

the insecurity continues while in the summer program where they end up skipping out on lunches, events, etc. to put in those extra hours, because for some reason they think they are more likely not to get an offer. and in general they are more nervous about interactions with other attorneys and their work product.

it is irrational because they earned their spot just like everyone else and are usually end up being more affable compared to the top school kids, once they manage to lighten up.

4:20

BIGLaw associates in Decatur make 160,000.

As a 1L at Texas, I'm curious about my school's nationwide rep. I know we're not top-top tier, but I've been thinking we're tier 1-A and not tier 2. Is this accurate? Opinions?

3:45, who the heck took you to a 5-hour dinner?! Probably somebody I didn't OCI with... oh well.

I'm in the callback process now, and I try to schedule afternoon appointments where possible, as I'm not at my best first thing in the morning. Also, callback lunches make me feel like I'm Steve Martin in the dinner scene in Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, where he's got a fork with a cork on the end. Chickpea escaped from my salad, onto the table? Oh god I just blew it! Afternoon callbacks are definitely preferable.

4:20: Apparently, you're not very savvy when it comes to the gravitas of a Illinois degree. I have a friend who went to Illinois (the good one, at U-C), did well, but not stellar, then got her LL.M. at GULC, then landed a highly coveted job at the U.N. (read: 1,000x more competitive than a spot at Wachtell) and is now working for a top international NGO (i.e., her dream job).

It might not be T10, but some people have more to offer than a piddling T10 J.D. and the smell of their own sh*t.

Maybe I am missing something, but why is Morgan Lewis proud of its efforts to recruit Tier 2 grads?

4:29: the firm where I work invites only Columbia, NYU, and, under protest, Fordham students to its NYC recruiting reception. Several attorneys from lower-ranked schools work at the firm. It's not so much insecurity/paranoia as recognizing the regard in which your employer holds your law school and acting accordingly.

As a summer associate, I didn't feel that recruiting treated me any differently because I didn't go to a top-tier law school, but I didn't get invited to lunch nearly as often as others in my class who went to NYU, Stanford, etc. I was in a small class, so it was pretty noticeable. Sure, it's no big deal, but I had to go out of my way to see and be seen while others didn't.

As to offers, I wasn't a jackass, so I wasn't really in danger of not getting an offer. However, I do think law firms give more thought to not extending offers to jackasses at schools they're panting to recruit from than they do to jackasses from lower-ranked schools.

I'm a 2L at Kentucky Mountain Bible College School of Law. I'm taking the Greyhound to Chicago next week for my call-back at Morgan Lewis. Can anyone recommend a good affordable motel?

Anyone who uses 'gravitas' in conversation or blog commenting should be taken back to high school and stuffed into a locker with his/her buddies from the debate 'circuit' for being a pretentious douche.

4:33 - If you do well and law review, you can get into any law firm in Texas. Outside Texas, well, if your daddy is a federal judge or you have good blackmail photos....

Firm that makes ANY effort to save money during recruiting = viewed as cheap or in financial trouble.

Ogre: And, if the same person who uses "gravitas" also uses "a" before a word starting with a vowel, it is obvious that person can expect a stellar legal career in Decatur.

FYI, tier 2ers complaining about no lunch shouldn't have wasted their time going to law school. T14 or bust. when will some reform come down limiting the # of law schools in this country? if only the whole process were more similar to med school admissions, we would have fewer idiots in the legal profession, and maybe that would help its reputation come out of the gutter.

I'm at MLB and I can say that this is blatantly false. Believe it or not, MLB Recruiting has some class and an idea of how to do things the right way.

You can do well with a T2 degree, just not great. Ask Harriet Miers.

For everyone interviewing in Orange County, California... you may be interviewing at Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Routh. I'm a tier 2 3L. I ended up at a California "Big 3" firm for my summer. I was NOT invited to lunch on my callback interview with SYCR. I'm not bitter though...

Ogre/5:32: Stop hating on me b/c I went to a better school than you did and thus, spend more of my time doing real work at a real job than I do spell-checking my blog-posts.

Oh, and you can suck my gravitas.

4:35,

C & H

3:45

What's more, Ogre, 'debating' is what lawyers do (that is, REAL lawyers, not biglaw monkeys).

SYCR pays market? weird. what's their rep like in socal? I considered myself fairly familiar with the socal legal market but have hardly ever heard of SYCR, much less knew that they paid market.

4:33 and 5:00, you're both way off. Texas is a Tier 1, period. I graduated from UT (and wasn't law review) and ended up with offers from the best firms in Texas, as well as one Vault 5 and one Vault 10 in NYC and Cali. There were probably about 10-15 of us who had offers from the Vault 5 firm outside of Texas. My friends on law review had offers everywhere except Wachtell.
Bottom line is (assuming you have a decent personality) if you're in the top third, you can work anywhere in Texas and many many places outside of Texas (incl. in NYC, DC, LA, etc.). If you're law review, you can work anywhere besides Wachtell.

i bet munger and williams & connolly are essentially closed to UT grads as well. so not just wachtell.

619: don't know about Munger but W&C is definitely not closed to UT grads. I interviewed with them and at least one UT 2L gets an offer every year.

ah, then i would wager that the right person could get an offer at wachtell as well.

On the Cosi gift certificates from Akin: They're $500 gift certificates. So who's cheap now?

We send people to Cosi because it's across the street from our office at DuPont Circle.

I'd rather get a $100 callback bonus than a $300 callback lunch at some fancy restaurant that I'll be sick of by the end of the summer. The summer associate fringe benefits/recruiting expenses are a bit overrated. We need some sort of Coasean exchange between law students and recruiters. I know I am not alone when I say that I'd gladly give up the expensive meals in exchange for a higher salary or bonus (not that I think $160K is too little).

I actually commend Akin for trying this. Cosi isn't necessarily my first choice - cash would be - but it is a creative approach to create value for both parties in the recruitment process.

isn't $500 overkill for cosi? just a bit.

Cosi-an bargaining, indeed!

foley & lardner in milwaukee does something similar for 1L interviewees from university of wisconsin. it almost invariably takes them to a substantially cheaper place than 1Ls from top schools.

As an interviewer, I hate the damn lunches. It blows a 2-hour hole in my day. Unless the interviewee is a total idiot there is nothing in the lunch that will make me vote against him/her (and the vetting is so intense at my firm, nobody makes it to a call back unless they already have the necessary credentials).

But giving a gift card to Cosi is stupid. It defeats the purpose of the lunch, which is to find out if this 2L is an idiot, or someone you wouldn't mind working with at 2 a.m.

Supposedly the deal at Akin is that once these kids get offers, they will be wined and dined until they accept.

I honestly think killing lunch is great. I hated going to lunches when I interviewed.

Wow, law students are getting more and more ridiculous. "I'd rather get a $100 callback bonus than a $300 callback lunch."
1) There are very few $300 lunches at the callback stage--VERY few.
2) Are you kidding me? Getting paid $3k+ per week for doing nothing more than going out to dinner and schmoozing all summer isn't good enough? NOW, you need a bonus for interviewing?
Wow, the Washpost article did not do justice to the amazing sense of entitlement at law schools today.

Apparently that was just a rumor, Akin isn't giving gift cards, they just aren't doing lunches this year.

Seems like a good idea to me...most of my callback lunches have been painful. If 9:39 is true, I'd rather get lunch or dinner with lawyers in a practice I care about who I know want me, than lunch with someone who probably doesn't want to be there anyway.

10:18 --

You apparently (a) did not read my post in its entirety and (b) don't understand economics / the Coase theorem.

My proposition was not based in any manner on a dissatisfaction with a $3100/week salary. The proposition is based on the premise that I would rather receive additional compensation than the fringe benefits associated with call back or other expensive lunches.

The problem in this setting is one of transaction costs. Firms can recruit me (and others like me) through significantly lower expenses if we could negotiate a solution that would deliver the same results -- at a lower cost to the firms and higher pay to the summers.

Again, this is not dissatisfaction with the $3100 pay. However, the insane amount of money firms spend entertaining summers demonstrates that they are worth more than $3100 to the firm.

I would rather receive some of that value than partake in entertainment that I do not value anywhere remotely close to its retail cost.

As for $300 lunches... I don't know where you work. But, last summer I went to more lunches costing more than $100/person lunches than not.

Keep the lunch, and give me a job.

Wow, as if naming yourself Heavily Recruited Law Student was not evidence enough, you make that post. You are one of the reasons that callback lunches are a good idea for the firms.

hahaha I bet the associates LOVE going on interview/summer lunches with you! "Let's talk about the Coase theorem and other fun mathematical principles! I am a complete dbag!"

Heavily recruited...than heavily rejected or at least no one will like working with you.

Don't taze me bro.

Corollary to the Coase theorem: 12:15=douche.

7:45, 8:50 & 9:24 -

You guys are idiots. It seems document review has fried your brain. I know thinking may hurt for people like you. But you should use some of the few independent brain cells you have left to think about the debate.

Its always easier to engage in personal attacks than to address the merits of a proposal.

It's about presentation, dumbass. You make a perfectly valid point about how the insane amounts of money spent on summer recruiting could be put to better purposes, but that doesn't do you any good if you sound like a total asshole in presenting your position. That's something you'll need to learn in the near future, or your career is not going to be nearly so spectacular as you seem to think it is.

10:36

Thanks for your concern for my future.

The point is not that the money could be "put to better use." As a summer, I wouldn't give up my benefits without some corresponding financial gain. The point is that firms could spend less AND give me more.

i have a T2 degree and currently have a 2 yr federal clerkship in a highly coveted district, and am going to get a $70K bonus from biglaw when i leave - so suck it.

I go to a T1 school, though not a top 10 school. I was accepted to 2 top 2 schools. But why would I waste my money going to one when I could go to a slightly lower-ranked school for free?

I now have an offer to join a Vault top 10 law firm. This is exactly where I would have ended up had I gone to a higher ranked school. But, it cost me $200,000 less.

I couldn't give 2 shits if I don't get a free meal because of where I went to school. $160,000 will go a lot further without the need to repay any loans.

"Heavily Recruited Law Student": I read your post and I do understand economics. What you do not understand is how economic theory works in the real world. When I was a summer, I would rather have received money for each and every summer event held, just as 99% of all summers would have.

Bottom line is no firm is ever going to replace a call-back lunch with a "call-back bonus" and to suggest that you could receive one suggests that you have a high sense of entitlement in addition to your high sense of self-worth (as your name reveals).

What do you guys think about Loyola Law school in Chicago? ( Do you think its prestigious, has a good reputation, do you think graduates make lots of money..ect..) Thanks! : )