Related Posts
Bowl Leader
Is it weekend yet? 🥱
I have tons of mushrooms, what should I cook?
Bowl Leader
Additional Posts in Law
Today is the kickoff for Well-Being Week in Law, which is about raising awareness around mental health and encouraging action and innovation across the legal profession to improve well-being.
Check out the fantastic resources put together by the wonderful team here: http://ow.ly/ftde50EBZKa
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
I do lots of hiring and regularly pass over candidates that are more experienced than the position requires. It’s partly for the reason you say but also because generally the salary expectations won’t line up with the salary range offered.
Thank you P1. That gives me more to think about. I need to now temper my expectations as I can’t honestly deny my experience.
Totally agree with P1. One major problem we face with hiring is that there is so much downward pressure from clients to lower bills that most firms have to find candidates that can be billed at the low end of the spectrum.
Exactly.
It's the same as being under qualified. If you're looking for an attorney with 5 years of experience, you don't need someone with 20 years any less than you need someone with 1 year. Same way you wouldn't hire a paralegal when you need an attorney.
Thank you P1 and P2. I appreciate you both. Let me make a further inquiry: If you both are fine with the associate’s extensive experience, expertise, and references; and the associate is fine with the salary and benefits, at this point - how much does it matter which law school the associate attended and where they ranked?
Some of us are still employed, but are looking. Others have been unemployed for several months. Many recruiters are not being exactly forthcoming in explaining some of the barriers with our employment search. Hearing from some of the decision makers brings more clarity at least to me.
Just an added point from another common recruiting partner. Firms of any size, particularly with multiple offices, are faced with balancing overall expectations regarding compensation and ascension. Often the easiest way to do this is to organize people in bands that have minimum and maximum compensation. Annual compensation reviews are made easier (read, possible) on the firm by limiting the conversation in this way. If there are 10 associates, having bespoke analysis and conversations is a grind, but it can and is done. Less so when there are 50 or 100 or 300.
What makes it hard is if we want a 3rd year associate and a 6th year applies, the expectation from the 6th year is that we will bring them in as a 6th year. Would I rather have someone with 6 years of experience doing 3rd year work and getting paid a 3rd year salary and charging at 3rd year rates? Absolutely. But the 6th year doesn't want that - they want to get 6th year money and 6th year work. So a lot of GREAT candidates with too much experience get passed over when we are hiring juniors. In some industries it's much easier to just be like, here's the role, do you have the experience to do the work, but in law (and especially big law) with a "years from graduation" based approach it is different.
I mean, yeah, this is a profession that is very much tied to perceived prestige. But in reality I almost NEVER see two candidate resumes where one is a T14 and a other is a regional law school, both with excellent grades and the right experience. I care more about experience and commitment to our practice than the best grades at an elite law school. But we rarely compare apples to apples - a lateral process is very one-off.