Add RSS RSS

Notes from the Breadline: Always Seem to Get Things Wrong (Part I)

Notes from the Breadline Roxana St Thomas.jpgEd. note: Welcome to the latest installment of “Notes from the Breadline,” a column by a laid-off lawyer in New York. Prior columns are collected here. You can reach Roxana St. Thomas by email (at roxanastthomas@gmail.com), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.

The news that filters down to the breadline these days can be confusing. “The recession is over!” some sources promise blithely. The recession may not be over, warn others, but “even stagnation would be better than recent history.” (Anecdotal evidence of stagnation — blessed, welcome stagnation — follow, substituting for tales of hope.)

In the legal press, though, the forecast is decidedly more circumspect. Bloodletting may have slowed at the nation’s law firms, but, between rumors of the billable hour’s demise and free-floating anxiety about the future of associate pay, the recession is far from receding into the distance in our collective rearview mirror.

I have been seeing a new recruiter, one in a string of casual liaisons which — like online dates — offer much promise initially, but usually stall after the second or third encounter. (Like the others, she was relentlessly positive and showered me with complements, and … well, I ended up showing her my résumé on the first date.) I decide to ask her whether she thinks the end of the recession has come to our corner of the professional world.

“Well,” says the recruiter (whose name, fortuitously, is Faith), “a lot of my clients are back to running ads and soliciting resumes. But they’re not necessarily hiring.” A long pause follows, and she adds, “Yet.”

“Are they interviewing?” I ask. She answers carefully, telling me brightly that, yes, “some people have gone on interviews, here and there!” In other words, I translate silently: no.

Later, thinking about our conversation, I realize that it has been many, many moons since I went on an interview. Indeed, I have to dig through my psychic archive (pushing aside the song lyrics, Big Lebowski trivia, and random New Yorker articles that clutter my mental hard drive) to remember the last time I actually donned a suit and appeared before a potential employer to have my tires kicked.

Of course, I find myself thinking, this dry spell cuts both ways. On one hand, I don’t particularly enjoy interviews; in fact, they can be downright excruciating. And the interviews with employers who are not hiring are even worse — exercises in frustration that leave you feeling like one of the dishes on a buffet from which the employer has no intention of actually dining. I could probably go over to Bloomberg and interview right now, I think defiantly … but for what? At the end of the day, I would have nothing to show for it, except maybe blisters from the now-alien experience of wearing of high heels, and a painful case of interview blue balls.

On the other hand, interviews offer a sense of affirmation. No matter how ultimately fruitless they are, they feel like progress, or tangible proof that your job search is something other than an ephemeral pastime.

In the midst of contemplating these imponderables, I receive an email from a friend of Notes from the Breadline. Our friend, a lovely Southern lady we’ll call “Sara Beth,” begins by telling me, “Yesterday I interviewed for an in-house employee relations counsel position that I reeeeeeally want. I’d previously had two telephone interviews and this face-to-face was the first and last time I’d meet the decision makers in person.” Sara Beth was so hopeful about the job, and so determined to put her best foot forward, that she “bought an entirely new outfit from shoes to suit to bag…. even a new bra. Spent hundreds of dollars that weren’t in the budget but I was just convinced this was the perfect job and I needed to look good.”

“The interview itself went … well, I really couldn’t tell,” she said. “I interviewed with 4 people. I think I said some good things. The general counsel said they were concerned with my level of experience (7 years), but I think I said good things to allay those concerns … Frankly, that’s the one thing I worried about: that I’m too young (we are, after all, in one of the few professions where gray hair is a good thing).”

How, then, did it turn into what she describes as a “nightmare job interview”?

Well, she tells me, it was quite sudden. “I had finished all of the interviews and was wrapping up with Bill,” who, she thinks, “will really be the decision maker on who they hire.” As an aside, Sara Beth says, while she “got along great” with Bill on the phone, at the in-person interview she “just wasn’t feeling the love.” But, she notes, “he also seemed really busy and distracted, so I wasn’t sure if I should take it personally. So Bill walked me to the lobby, I turned in my security badge to the security guard at the desk, and we shook hands. I did my best ‘Thank you for inviting me in, I’m really excited about the position’ handshake,” and then turned to walk out the front door.

It was there — just inches away from a graceful departure, and freedom — that things went terribly awry. “For some awful reason,” she laments, “I selected the revolving doors in the middle instead of the regular doors on either side. From the corner of my eye, I saw Bill sort of open his mouth to say something and then not say anything, which did not register until later. I stepped into the little glass revolving door wedge, pushed …and nothing happened. Pushed again. Nothing.” Assuming the door was locked, Sara Beth turned to walk back in the lobby, planning to try a side door. Then, she tells me,

SUDDENLY: I heard the sound of a motor starting up and the door started to revolve all on its own. And disturbingly fast, I might add. Before I knew what happened, my bag had wedged itself between the back side of my little glass wedge in the revolving door and the door frame, causing the whole thing to grind to a stop and trapping me inside.

Sara Beth panicked. “My internal monologue,” she writes, was “oh shit oh shit oh shit oh shit.” She continues:

I made eye contact with a guy who had been sitting on a couch in the waiting area this whole time. Then he stood up, and he and the security guard came rushing over. She was trying to tug my bag free, which I didn’t understand at first so for a few moments we might have been playing tug-o-war with the bag, I really don’t remember. Then she got my bag free.

It gets worse. The motor continued, the door began to revolve again and ran over my big toe. Took a chunk right out of my brand new Calvin Klein (not on sale) shoes. I got my foot free from the door and before I could even register the pain, the door continued revolving and I was expelled from my wedge and out the front of the building (because that motorized revolving door was determined to make its full revolution notwithstanding my bag, my toe, my ego, etc).

For an agonizing, confusing moment, I was standing outside of the building by myself, no bag. The security guard and the guy in the waiting room rushed to the side door and she handed me my bag, asked if I was okay.

Despite the foregoing, Sara Beth hoped that she could escape with a scintilla of dignity. But seriously, folks: what are the chances of that happening? At the very least, she tells me, “I guess I thought (read: prayed) that I’d been trapped in the door for so long that Bill had time to leave the lobby before knowing anything was wrong. But naturally, he’d heard the commotion and come back over.”

After that, things went something like this:

SECURITY GUARD: Are you okay?

SARA BETH: (looking down at my tattered left shoe). Oh, I’m fine. (Fake smile.)

BILL: You’re probably not even the first person that’s happened to today. That door is awful. I never use that door.

SARA BETH: Oh, well…. gosh, I…. (frantically looking for sign that might have said: “Caution: revolving door is motorized” but not finding one). I just didn’t expect it to move…. I…

BILL: Are you hurt?

SARA BETH: (in severe physical and emotional pain) I mean, it hurts a little bit, but it’ll be fine. (Fake smile.)

SG: (also looking down at my tattered shoe) Do you want to fill out an incident report?

SARA BETH: No, no, no, no, of course not. It’s just a shoe! (Fake smile, starting to feel lump in throat.)

SG: Are you sure?

SARA BETH: Yes, I’m sure (read: I don’t want to hassle the company with which I’m trying to get a job as a lawyer). [To Bill]: I just wish I could have made a more graceful exit!

BILL: [smiles] Well, we certainly will remember who you are!

Upon reaching her car, Sara Beth called her husband. Darling Husband, she reports, “laughs until he realizes that I am sobbing.” At least, she says, “I didn’t cry in front of Bill.” On the bright side, she notes, “my new bag wasn’t damaged, and I’ve already searched youtube today for ‘girl stuck in a revolving door’ and as far I can tell, they didn’t post the security video.”

Sara Beth tells me that her putative employers “said they’d let me know either way by the end of next week. I’ll be surprised if they actually do decide that quickly, but I hope they do to put me out of my misery.” Then, she adds, “It’s not that I think they would consciously reject me solely based on the door incident, but I was already worried that I’m too young and my whole big-girl act I worked so hard to have all afternoon was dashed in 5 minutes, and that’s the last thing he’s going to remember. And it’s all I will remember about the day so when I inevitably get rejected, I’ll always blame that damned door.”

Sara Beth wonders whether I have heard, from other readers, about similarly uninspiring experiences. I think about it, and then talk it over with Lat.

“I love nightmare interview stories!” he says, stroking his chin thoughtfully. “If nothing else, they remind you that, no matter how badly an interview goes, it could always be worse. It could end with you stuck in the revolving door, battling the security guard for possession of your bag while your toe is mangled beyond recognition!”

And, of course, like all thoughtful chin-stroking, Lat’s insight led to another suggestion. To wit, dear readers: it’s time for another Homework Assignment from the Breadline. Since you did such a beautiful job with your responses to the last such assignment, we want to hear your stories about the best, worst job interviews you’ve been on. Think of it as a public service: those of us who can’t remember our last interview need something to be grateful for, and those who have been on bad interviews of their own need some perspective.

I look forward to reading your responses. Spare no detail — I want to hear the good, the bad, and the ugly. Email me at roxanastthomas@gmail.com, or send me a message on Facebook. Thanks!
______________________________________________________________________
Roxana St. Thomas is a laid-off lawyer living in New York. You can reach her by email (at roxanastthomas@gmail.com), follow her on Twitter, or find her on Facebook.

Earlier: Prior installments of Notes from the Breadline

Comments

avatar
1 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:45 PM

I am first and what is this?!?

avatar
2 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:47 PM

TTTurd

avatar
3 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:49 PM

1 - ATL's highest traffic, most popular feature (according to Lat at least).

avatar
4 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:50 PM

"interview blue balls" - Roxana FTW

avatar
5 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:52 PM

zzz

avatar
6 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:56 PM

talking to Roxanna probably wasnt smart, since Bill may read this and immediately identify you

avatar
7 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:56 PM

After reading that, I would like death by snu snu please.

MacNeil

avatar
8 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:02 PM

Srsly, dump this incoherent column already. If I wanted to read poorly written fiction I would take my breaks in a truck stop bathroom. Dialogue fail.

avatar
9 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:03 PM

6, this is all made up. No worries about Bill finding out.

avatar
10 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:03 PM

nobody caresssssss

avatar
11 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:03 PM

Latham partners are a sneaky lot. They freeze salaries to "prevent layoffs," then wait a couple months to fire everyone. Then, after everyone's been fired, they don't lift the pay freeze. Mo money mo money mo money for the partners.

FYI, a bunch of senior associates are threatening to leave. Latham doesn't care though. They'll just make the people who can't jump ship work more consecutive all nighters to pick up the slack. Cha-ching!

avatar
12 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:04 PM

TL DNR

avatar
13 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:06 PM

Suggestion: Create two ATL sites. One for the actual, true stories about the legal market and another - Fake ATL - for crappy fiction and other drivel. Hate to sound like a snob, but I don't come to this site for boring garbage like NFTB. The new site could be called walmart.com or wal-mart.com.

avatar
14 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:09 PM

I suppose I should know the answer this question, but is Sara Beth accredited by the laws of New York as being legally married to her husband?

avatar
15 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:13 PM

14- Fail. www.Goodsharks.com

avatar
16 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:13 PM

DIAF.

avatar
17 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:13 PM

Paragraph 3 - should be "compliments" not "complements"

avatar
18 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:19 PM

Thanks, Roxana. But for you, I wouldn't have known that women could experience "blue balls."

avatar
19 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:20 PM

TLDNR

avatar
20 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:29 PM

If "Bill" turns her down for the job because she got stuck in the revolving doors, then Bill is a real jerk (how unusual for the legal profession) and she wouldn't want to work for or with him every day in any event.

avatar
21 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:40 PM

Floater

avatar
22 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:42 PM

"1 - ATL's highest traffic, most popular feature (according to Lat at least)."

I'd bet $100 that Lat writes this column.

avatar
23 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:56 PM

Roxana = EPIC FAIL!

avatar
24 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:56 PM

22

If it is high traffic and popular, why are there so few comments?

avatar
25 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:57 PM

The Obama recession continues.

avatar
26 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:57 PM

11 - How exactly do senior associates threaten to leave, and what could they hope to accomplish by their threats?

avatar
27 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 4:59 PM

CAN WE PLEASE TURN OUR UNDIVIDED ATTENTION TO THE PLIGHT OF THE SUMMERS TO WHOM MAYER BROWN HAS SO CALLOUSLY FAILED TO GIVE OFFERS? THIS IS TRULY CAUSING SUFFERING OF THE UTMOST DEGREE, AND NONE OF US SHOULD REST UNTIL THIS SHOCKING INJUSTICE HAS BEEN REMEDIED.

avatar
28 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:07 PM

I hate to admit it but I read this whenever it is the top feature on ATLwhen check the site. Even though my experience has taught me the column will be terrible. Always. It's like a train wreck, I guess.

Why not just ask people to share horrible interview stories?

Lots of people contribute to the practice area threads (likely the best feature on this site) without the crappy fiction, poor choice of homonyms, or waiting painfully for the inevitable chin-stroking, make-believe dialog.

avatar
29 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:09 PM

24 - I was quoting an earlier comment that said it was high traffic and popular, allegedly according to Lat. I think the column is a piece of crap. I would also add that over half of the comments are either completely off-topic or just to comment on how crappy the column is.

avatar
30 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:15 PM

27 - Set a grip. Seriously... you are experiencing "suffering of the utmost degree"? Seriously? Come on now. You were no-offered and have another year to figure out what to do. You aren't even suffering to the laid-off-Latham -first-year degree. Get a little perspective and lay off the caffeine before commenting in all caps.

avatar
31 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:28 PM

Does anyone actually read these posts? They keep showing up in my RSS reader and I'm always surprised how long and seemingly pointless they are. I recognize that it is somewhat hypocritical to waste time even commenting but, come on ATL.

Between the breadline series, the 24-hour a day coverage of "Lavender Law," and Elie's work in general, it seems like maybe one out of every ten stories is actually worth scanning (let alone reading).

avatar
32 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:35 PM

We need to bomb the bread line back to the stone age.


-DOJ Secure

avatar
33 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:36 PM

7 Rocks

avatar
34 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 5:38 PM

Take heart TTTs. Most Latham associates are miserable. They're trickling out now, and once opportunities open up, there's going to be a mass exodus out of that firm. No one from a good firm is going to want to lateral there, so you'll be competitive for a slot at LaTTTham. Firing 400 associates and slaughtering first years will do that to a firm.

See, everything works out in the end.

avatar
35 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 6:13 PM

31, I keep reading it hoping that this will somehow get better. I don't know why I bother. It doesn't. This column is consistently horrible.

avatar
36 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 6:14 PM

Give Latham credit for taking care of its associates. Every biglaw firm has laid people off in this downturn but not a single one has topped the comparatively generous severance package given by Latham. It's unfair for the firm to be punished for being upfront and generous.

avatar
37 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 6:16 PM

Lat, PLEASE quit writing this crap.

avatar
38 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 6:19 PM

And if you INSIST on writing this crap, quit writing about thoughtful chin stroking

avatar
39 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 7:11 PM

I really liked this column in the beginning. The first two or three installments were colorfully written and relevant to a segment of the legal community. Now it's just bad build-up to Lat's chin stroking. Most likely written by Lat. Who else would could describe his balls and high heels in the same sentence?

avatar
40 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 7:55 PM

I used to be a huge fan but this column has completely run out of steam. I keep hoping against hope that there will finally be an entry with some depth and poignancy, and instead I just get more disappointed each time. It's now just boring and completely irrelevant. Truly a waste of time.

avatar
41 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 8:11 PM

Cute story. Thanks for the lift.

Sorry about your nice new shoes.

Bill was a dufus for not warning you about the door. It's like he's WAITING for the building to get sued. Duh.

avatar
42 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:02 PM

The problem is we're all overfocused, obsessed with detail, logic, and perfection. We're experiencing here the female version of Elie Mystal: bad writing, lots of cliches (mostly inapposite), ridiculous similes, non-existing characters, mindless repetition, kissing Lat's ass, sexual connotations without a follow-up, changes in focus in the middle of a paragraph, inconsistencies, lack of internal structure, to name a few.

We need a drug that can be patented under the trade name "Mystal" in regular (for tier 2 grads) and ES (for tier 1 grads) to loosen up, to be like Elie and Roxana. Carefree. Careless. Stupid.

Lat. On a serious note, Roxana needs psychiatric help (read the first paragraph of every essay). She's psychotic today and hallucinating. You gotta help her.

avatar
43 Posted by guest | Permalink Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:04 PM

Worse than even the Legal Eagle wedding announcements. Just awful.

avatar
44 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 5:43 AM

I didn't realize that people were willing to take the time to relay a story that bad. That was awful and had nothing to do with this blog. I would want to hear about a particularly gruesome grilling by a partner - not some mishap with a revolving door. This could not have been worse.

avatar
45 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 5:46 AM

obama lsat score?

avatar
46 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 9:20 AM

bush gmat score? we have an intelligent black man as president. get over it already.

avatar
47 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:26 PM

How odd that people who hate this column come back for more and then take time out to comment. It's the internet people. Internet blogs do not require praise-worthy writing. Personally, I like fiction but sometimes I don't have time to read novels and this is interesting enough to entertain for a few minutes. If you don't like fiction or you don't like the Breadline . . .don't read it.

avatar
48 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:19 PM

I think Roxanna's plan is to make this column so insufferable that someone will hire her just to stop her from writing more. Genius.

avatar
49 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:54 PM

you sound so god damned condescending with you "my dear reader"..."homework assignment" bullshit. much improved writing (or rather bitching) this time, but please do us a favor and cut the crap with your attempt to be cutesy and "assign us homework" which "we've completed in the past like good little boys and girls."

avatar
50 Posted by guest | Permalink Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:54 PM

you sound so god damned condescending with your "my dear reader"..."homework assignment" bullshit. much improved writing (or rather bitching) this time, but please do us a favor and cut the crap with your attempt to be cutesy and "assign us homework" which "we've completed in the past like good little boys and girls."

avatar
51 Posted by guest | Permalink Friday, September 18, 2009 12:00 AM

gag

Post Your Comment