Jump to content

jwms

Members
  • Content Count

    121
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

jwms last won the day on October 5 2019

jwms had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

82 Decent People

About jwms

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

696 profile views
  1. To my understanding, there would not be any punishment for your undergrad school or program being smaller.
  2. I think roughly half of my 4th year transcript had 1st/2nd year courses. Didn't impact anything for me. Anecdotally, I don't think it's a factor at all.
  3. Are you saying 6 hours a day is a lot? In any event, ProfReader is correct. If your intention is to determine whether you can replicate your work habits from undergrad, then this should probably be less of a question about the requisite number of hours and more that this is just a different form of studying and exam-preparation than your undergrad likely had. And there's a lot of threads on that issue, fwiw. In my experience, 6 hours a day is totally unnecessary, but there's certainly enough material that if your intention is to read everything, it probably would take 6 hours per day. Reading any of the assigned material, nevermind all of it, is not necessary to get an H/HH, in my view. (the biggest determining factor of getting an H/HH is getting a great map/summary + study group -- again, my own perspective and that doesn't work for everyone)
  4. Is this smart, though? How many will jump for the articling recruit, if this was their primary motivation?
  5. Further to this, the notion that applicants' strong, negative reactions to this OCI process are about the logistics of the process itself and not the overwhelming feeling of rejection in a fishbowl environment where everyone's then sitting next to their 'competitors' for the next ~6 months ... is an impressive logical contortion. And beyond this even, while the process is logistically simplified, the compressed timeline (for both firms and applicants) and psychological pressure makes it such that it's impossible for firms or applicants to truly get it 'right' in finding a good fit. Students that say 'first choice' because it's clear that a firm wants them to say it and pressures them to do so, leaving that student to not say it elsewhere, only to find that pressuring firm was stringing them along -- that type of interview pressure is unique to the Toronto law recruit. That firms may wind up hiring ~20% more people than they wanted because of the absurd structure to the system is also demonstrative of this deeply flawed system. The refrain that the real world is somehow tougher than this is not analogous and unhelpful. And, by the way, this is coming from someone who went through the OCI process and enjoyed it (for all its chaos, it was a good time -- unique, certainly). That doesn't prevent me from recognizing that the system is deeply flawed and empathizing with those who fell through the cracks because of those flaws.
  6. Sample size. This is one student who is not representative of anything at U of T.
  7. This is definitely less of a general 2L Recruit questions thread than it is a Newfoundland 2L Recruit questions thread.
  8. Right -- all the more reason to not be overly stressed about the process or over-prepare. Good to be prepared, but this isn't the be-all, end-all. It's a ridiculous process (and all parties involved know it's ridiculous), but it's definitely a unique experience. And there's so much professional movement (be it laterals or juniors going in-house) that regardless of where you start your legal career, you can change jobs with a little work within ~2 years of call if you desire. I say this because a lot of the over-analyzing in this thread (while natural) is so inconsequential in even a medium-sized-picture of things.
  9. Typically yes, though I did have some firms switch it up on me day-of, and I wound up meeting with different interviewers.
  10. Agreed. To add to this (or repeat), I had a 10am Tuesday interview with one firm where that issue (them being literally my last interview slot) was the elephant in the room and so we discussed it. I stated clearly why the scheduling worked out that way, to which they immediately understood and expressed interest in speaking more explicitly about my level of interest in them and how to move this forward. I think addressing the scheduling, and then being clear with your interest level will more than compensate.
  11. No, that's perfectly fine. Most of my interviews were less than 1.5 hrs anyway.
  12. You can't leave the dinner early enough to get to the other dinner on time. Dinners typically have a chunk of time for mingling/drinks, then assigned seating thereafter. I don't think it's feasible to go to two dinners in one night without both firms realizing what you're doing.
  13. It's easy to over-think these things -- try not to. There are dozens of reasons as to why they offered a 3pm slot, and very few of them would revolve around their having some chronology/hierarchy. Congratulations on the in-firms!
  14. Yes, it does look bad. Don't do this.
  15. Definitely not an issue. The um okay was probably them looking down at their sheet to figure out where next to slot you in. Also, the caller was likely not in any position to influence or be in the room to recruitment decision-making, and is likely agnostic on all this.
×
×
  • Create New...