Jump to content

Cookies20000

Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cookies20000

  1. What I have to say applies strictly to Big Law. Not trying to be negative here, just being honest because I wish I knew this before making the decision to go to law school: I have found that it's generally seen as a negative to be a mature student, unless you have very strong grades or great work experience (e.g. you're an engineer, an accountant, you worked at the PMO, or the like) to compensate for it. If it's "middle-class" type work experience, such as some nondescript office job where you started at an entry level position and then maybe you got promoted a rung or two up, it will be an uphill battle for "Big Law" jobs. I say "middle-class" to refer to jobs that are not fancy or prestigious, that you don't need a professional degree or designation for, and that are paid middling salaries. This isn't to say that I personally think such work experience can't be just as important and valuable as the other aforementioned jobs. I have simply found that student committees at Big Law firms don't look favourably upon being out of school for 5+ years and "only" having a middle-class job to show for it. Put differently, that kind of work is not sufficient to overcome the mature student status that is generally viewed as a negative by default. In sum, it's not impossible to overcome, but it's a default negative. As you can tell, I found many of the folks at those firms quite privileged and inclined to turn their noses up at so-called middle-class jobs. Bear in mind, this does not apply to non-mature students, i.e. having a "middle-class" job is otherwise fine without the mature student penalty.
  2. Curious if anyone has heard from Crown Criminal Division in Kingston/Belleville/Cornwall
  3. Out of curiosity, has anyone heard from MAG CLD for Belleville/Cornwall/Kingston?
  4. . The self-congratulatory posts lack tact, but ultimately, I don't think the individuals behind the posts should be attacked to the extent that they are. Don't get me wrong, I could see why others are very upset. The recruitment process was rough. Even those of us who got jobs did not get them at our first choice, for example. Some individuals evidently are proud of having taken a job and one that was their first choice and that's great. I salute them and understand why they want to declare their victory to the world of LinkedIn. Does it sting a bit? Yeah. Will I remember in a few months? Probably not. The posts were in bad taste but I don't think it's a big deal.
  5. I have an in-firm with a "small" firm that specializes in a certain area. I am not sure if this is important, but it has a larger office in another city. I am interested in this firm's practice area and quite enjoyed my OCI with this firm, more than my OCIs with any other firm actually. I would like to know what I can do to increase my chances of obtaining an offer at this firm. This is a broad question: does anyone have any insight as to how in-firms at "small" firms are different (vs. in-firms at large or mid-sized firms) in terms of what small firms look for in candidates? For example, will it be of particular importance to them that I am able to demonstrate an interest in their practice area or that I express interest in them specifically? I understand my question is broad and that firms are very different, but any insight would be helpful, as I do not know what to expect or what I should do differently, if i should do anything differently at all. I do like this firm a lot, from what I have seen, so I am a bit nervous about the in-firm. Thanks in advance.
  6. I'm looking to apply for a position that requires me to list references. There's a class I liked and that I participated in frequently. I only received a B+, but I believe I have a decent relationship with the prof. I wouldn't say that we have a strong connection, I would just say that we have a decent relationship. That said, is it likely that she would agree to act as a reference? Or is it weird for me to ask, given that I received a pretty average grade her class? Thanks in advance.
  7. I agree with this. Looking back, I would say it was not possible to prepare for most questions. While it’s good to have a succinct answer for some questions, like “Why law?” “Why x firm?” “What were your favourite courses?” it’s not possible to anticipate exactly what they will say in advance about your section on interests.
  8. I echo what others here have said: that is very odd that you had higher than a B+ no OCIs at all. I strongly suggest that you look into this because many firms have still prioritized grades heavily in this recruit. Although you may be at a school that does not have a great OCI-to-student ratio (U of T and Oz supposedly having the best OCI-to-student ratio) it’s worth looking into for your next applications.
  9. Hi, I have OCIs for my top choices close to the end of the day. I know that my interviewers will likely be exhausted by then and wanting to get the process over with. My questions are: (1) What are tips for making my interview go better, in light of the fact that my interviewers will likely be tired and checked out by the time of my interview? (2) Is this a bad sign (e.g. of their interest in me as a candidate)? It was my belief that schedules were system-generated based on availability and not any other factor, but the fact that these firms are more competitive firms, coupled with the fact that, I feel, my grades are only somewhat above-average make me think that this isn't a coincidence.
  10. I understand that advice could be good advice and yet be savage because there may be no way to deliver honest advice without being harsh. I take no issue with that. I take issue with individuals on this forum who are unnecessarily harsh, a key word being “unnecessarily.” If your co-worker comes in wearing turquoise pants and a red dress shirt, you can either tell her that the colours of her outfit clash or that she looks like a “fucking clown.” (I will not explain why one might refrain from calling one’s co-worker a clown even if she, in fact, resembles a clown. It is my hope that this is obvious.) Too many folks here do the latter and seem to get some strange kick out of it. This, I should add, is a tad fucked up and signals the existence of untreated deep-seated issues. It’s a safe bet that these same individuals would fare poorly in an in-person confrontation and would not nearly be as aggressive in-person as they are online. You all know who you are. You need to chill. It’ll make you a bit happier.
  11. Go for it. Manage your expectations, but don’t count yourself out. If it’s the case that grades will be given less weight this year, you may be able to offset your grades with the experience you have.
  12. OP is right. Some of you are unnecessarily savage. These forums can get pretty toxic and it's kind of sad. It has definitely prevented some people from posting.
  13. if there’s anyone out there feeling down too, you’re not alone. Others and I are feeling so down too. if you’re scared about what others might think of you if you don’t get a job, you’re not alone. Others and I feel the same. we’re in a weird environment (ie the law school environment) where we’re told it’s the end of the world if you don’t get a job in the 2L recruit. try not to worry - it’s not the end of the world. keep going and try to keep your spirits up so that you put the best application together that you can. all the best & god bless
  14. There is a myriad of reasons as to why someone might elect to make a formal complaint as opposed to speaking to the professor directly. First, the fact pattern in the assignment is not an isolated incident (which, I understand, I did not share at the outset). I will decline to provide greater detail, but the professor has said or done other things as well. I have concluded that these events, in their totality, represent a certain pattern of thinking that I do not believe should be afforded the benefit of the doubt. Second, even if it were not an isolated incident, someone in a position of significant responsibility ought to know and do better. For that reason, I am again disinclined to giving the benefit of the doubt. I see that many of us have different conceptions of what "indirect" or "subtle" racism/homophobia/etc. is. I won't provide further detail other than that I had friends both inside and outside law who read the fact pattern and thought it was, at the very least, "inappropriate" or "incredibly unprofessional." Friends who were members of the group that the fact pattern would offend all found it racist/homophobic/sexist/transphobic (whichever one it is). Third, raising the issue with the person makes sense if it would be productive to do so. This. I won't say much more other than that I got into a disagreement with this professor after class. I was the only student in the room and it got ugly. (I am going to use pronouns for men here for simplicity's sake.) I disagreed with him firmly about something in class. He became aggressive and made personal comments towards me. I called him out directly, telling him to his face that he was being racist/homophobic/sexist/transphobic. He then swiftly apologized to me. It was fucking tough to call her/him out in the moment, but it was every bit worth it to stand up for myself. I have confronted many of my peers/equals/coworkers without flinching, which is awkward as fuck, but sometimes necessary. This was one of the first times I confronted someone in a position of power to me and it was not easy. So, I can assure you that the reason I won't be raising these issues with the prof directly is, not because I'm not insecure or immature (I might be immature, but not based on this, ha), but because it would be a waste of my time. It was pretty fucking awkward after that. I could tell s/he was worried about our squabble because s/he was very nice to me after this incident. Unfortunately, even after that uncomfortable confrontation, her/his indirect racism/homophobia/sexism/transphobia continued in class. And that's what I have a problem with. This professor is good friends with the faculty that I think has to deal with my complaint. I am concerned about ruining my name with professors whose courses I may want to take or from whom I may want to ask references in the future. I want to stand up for what is right, but unfortunately it seems that it would be at potential great cost to myself.
  15. The latter. I got a good grade, actually. It has nothing to do with the grade. Ive spoken to the professor about other issues. She or he is not an open-minded person to say the least.
  16. Long story short, I had a low-value assignment where the professor's answer (according to the answer key) to a fact pattern was, in my opinion, (one of) racist/homophobic/sexist/transphobic. I am being deliberately vague and do not want to get much further into detail. The species of racism/homophobia/sexism/transphobia in this case is the more subtle or indirect kind. The professor also seems to express similar opinions during his or her lectures. I have solicited honest opinions from select friends in and outside law school and friends who are practising lawyers. So far, they all agree with me. If we assume that I have a legitimate complaint, would anything meaningful come from filing a complaint with the administration? Or is it a complete waste of time? Also, what penalties could I possibly incur? If anyone has experience in this area, I would greatly appreciate it.
  17. i was considering pushing myself on the off chance that i could somehow get an academic award, but our school has given us zero information on that and even if they had, my chances would be too slim anyway, so it's just not enough of a motivator. though, i must admit that some mild worry is setting in given that i haven't finished my summaries for 4/6 courses and exams are starting on the 13th. meh, should be fine.
  18. I am at a mandatory p/f school. to be frank, i am not studying that hard. how hard is everyone else studying?
  19. Disclaimer: this is entirely anecdotal. I agree with the point that U of T students seem to be more privileged. My significant other attends U of T and I currently attend another Ontario law school. S/He generally found that many students are privileged. (I went to U of T events with her/him and found that to be true.) I do not consider that to be the case generally at my school, where many students seem to come from middle class backgrounds. Edit: I would also add that I can see small differences affecting law school performance: working during law school, living situations (e.g. living alone vs. with many difficult roommates), worrying about the cost of expenses (e.g. not printing notes/summaries to avoid buying printer ink), etc.
  20. As widespread as p/f systems are, I suspect (and hope) that firms would not be willing to hire students on the basis of minor factors, such as ECs and undergrad grades. It seems to be a risky move for a business to hire on the basis of so little information. I would wager that they will push the recruit back to wait for more grades to come in and to assess their business needs. I have now warmed up to mandatory p/f now, since I have done close to nothing these past few days and have now caught up on various TV shows. Hopefully Osgoode officially adopts mandatory p/f so as to make it increasingly unlikely that firms will hold a 2L recruit on the usual schedule.
  21. I am very annoyed at the decision of my school to adopt a p/f system. Some students at my school said it was the most "equitable" way of evaluating students. It annoys me that in all likelihood, things like ECs and personality types will carry more weight in hiring decisions. People who have very strong and unique ECs are likely to be those who are privileged (e.g. those who have parents who can get their children fancy bullshit internships in MPs' offices). In fact, I saw grades as a great way for those who do not excel in terms of ECs or extroversion to stand out. Ironically, this could really hurt a lot of underprivileged students.
×
×
  • Create New...