Day 3 Interview

[CleanHands]

8 minutes ago, MapleLeafs said:

Yes, of course. You're not obligated to make a decision immediately 

FWIW it's worth I did exactly this during OCIs with the first firm that called me (very respectfully, telling them that I really appreciated the offer and asking for a bit of time to consider), they refused to give me any time to consider the offer and said I had to make a decision during that call, and I declined their offer and walked away based on that.

This completely goes against the rules of the recruit but they did it anyways. So, although what you say is correct with respect to what the rules are, I'd advise people to consider in advance what they would do if a firm refuses to play by them.

Edited November 9, 2022 by CleanHands

[ZukoJD]

23 minutes ago, QMT20 said:

I told the firm that was my second choice they were my second choice and they still gave me an offer. 

You don't have to be that blunt if you don't feel comfortable. Just say something like you've really enjoyed meeting everyone there the past few days and you'd welcome the opportunity to work there, something like that. As long as you don't say they're your first choice they won't think you've misled them if you turn them down tomorrow. 

This is fairly common. Sometimes your host or a lawyer who doesn't know the whole picture invites you back for day 3 after your second-interview. But then everyone gets together day 2 evening and they decide who they want to offer and who they're going to cut. 

It's always a bitter experience and I'm sorry to hear it's one you're going through. I wish you the best for tomorrow and I hope things work out in the end. 

How common is it to deny a student the opportunity to even interview with the people they were told they’d interview with, due to the firm’s own scheduling errors? 

[CleanHands]

EDIT - Sorry, I just read previous posts that answered my question. Would appreciate it if the mods could delete this.

Edited November 9, 2022 by CleanHands

[QMT20]

1 minute ago, ZukoJD said:

How common is it to deny a student the opportunity to even interview with the people they were told they’d interview with, due to the firm’s own scheduling errors? 

There were 3 people in my circle of friends who had day 3 interviews rescinded in the year we went through in firms. 

I don't remember if the firms said it was a scheduling error or not. Really what happened was just their host or another lawyer invited them back for day 3 before consulting with the rest of the student panel. So when decisions were actually made in the evening of day 2, they were cut. 

[BetterCallPaul]

Ok good to know, thank you!

[ZukoJD]

Just now, QMT20 said:

There were 3 people in my circle of friends who had day 3 interviews rescinded in the year we went through in firms. 

I don't remember if the firms said it was a scheduling error or not. Really what happened was just their host or another lawyer invited them back for day 3 before consulting with the rest of the student panel. So when decisions were actually made in the evening of day 2, they were cut. 

Oh no, I mean being denied the opportunity to even have my proper day 2 interview I participated in today. I met with 1 of 4 interviewers. 

[easttowest]

8 minutes ago, ZukoJD said:

How common is it to deny a student the opportunity to even interview with the people they were told they’d interview with, due to the firm’s own scheduling errors? 

Do you mean you were told you’d meet Lawyer X but Lawyer Y showed instead? Very common, at least in my experience. 

Now if you were being brought back specifically to meet Lawyer X because you asked and they agreed, that’d be more surprising. 
 

In my cycle, I was in the lobby on Wednesday morning waiting to come up for my interview when my host called to let me know it wasn’t happening. 

Given your last post that sort of happened to me to at another place. I was told that a few lawyers would be rotating through. Only one showed up and it was real awkward when they were wrapping up and I asked who might be coming next. 

Edited November 9, 2022 by easttowest

[ZukoJD]

7 minutes ago, easttowest said:

Do you mean you were told you’d meet Lawyer X but Lawyer Y showed instead? Very common, at least in my experience. 

Now if you were being brought back specifically to meet Lawyer X because you asked and they agreed, that’d be more surprising. 
 

In my cycle, I was in the lobby on Wednesday morning waiting to come up for my interview when my host called to let me know it wasn’t happening. 

Given your last post that sort of happened to me to at another place. I was told that a few lawyers would be rotating through. Only one showed up and it was real awkward when they were wrapping up and I asked who might be coming next. 

I was told I was meeting with lawyers A B C and D today. I went into the meeting and lawyer A was there and apologized, saying they had a scheduling error and that lawyer B was booked up. We spoke briefly then lawyer A had to leave. I never spoke with lawyers B C and D. 

I communicated this immediately to them. They still invited me back (I wasn’t that shocked because things went great up to then) and then they rescinded later. 

 

Edited November 9, 2022 by ZukoJD

[BlockedQuebecois]

@ZukoJD what you’re describing would be uncommon (at least in my experience) and I am sorry you’re upset by it. Your frustration is completely warranted.

With that said, it’s not like it matters from an end-result perspective. The firm was undoubtedly rude and should have handled it better – but they weren’t going to hire you, and you’re better off knowing that than wasting your time (and potentially your first choice language) with a firm that wasn’t going to give you an offer anyways. Your options are either to let it go, or share what firm it is with your peers (particularly those in first year, who may want to consider what happened in deciding where to apply and interview at next year). 

[ZukoJD]

15 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

@ZukoJD what you’re describing would be uncommon (at least in my experience) and I am sorry you’re upset by it. Your frustration is completely warranted.

With that said, it’s not like it matters from an end-result perspective. The firm was undoubtedly rude and should have handled it better – but they weren’t going to hire you, and you’re better off knowing that than wasting your time (and potentially your first choice language) with a firm that wasn’t going to give you an offer anyways. Your options are either to let it go, or share what firm it is with your peers (particularly those in first year, who may want to consider what happened in deciding where to apply and interview at next year). 

Was my last crack at the recruit unfortunately. 

[LMP]

5 minutes ago, ZukoJD said:

Was my last crack at the recruit unfortunately. 

I think he's referring to the articling recruit! 

[QMT20]

3 minutes ago, ZukoJD said:

Was my last crack at the recruit unfortunately. 

It'll be ok. People I know and some of the people on this forum fell through the cracks during recruit. Ultimately, they still got to where they wanted to be. 

You'll have to hustle more than if you landed in the recruit. But there's light at the end of the tunnel. 

[Peculiar Frond]

31 minutes ago, BlockedQuebecois said:

@ZukoJD what you’re describing would be uncommon (at least in my experience) and I am sorry you’re upset by it. Your frustration is completely warranted.

It’s neither here nor there, but @ZukoJD, a firm did this to me many years ago. After all this time, I still can’t bring myself to show that firm any more respect than they showed me.

You’re right to be upset. I’m still flabbergasted that any firm would of treat obviously smart, well qualified, future colleagues and business partners that way. You’ll go on to have a great career and, in the long run, in a real sense, this is their loss. 

Edited November 9, 2022 by Peculiar Frond

[Turtles]

I've had a few friends now being told at the end of a Day 1 or 2 interview at a particular firm something along the lines of "we'd love to have you back tomorrow, give me your availability now, ok we'll reach out later today with the details" and then getting a call in the evening saying it was a mistake and canceling. IDK if the firm is operating in bad faith trying to mislead to tie up slots before they decide who to give interviews, or it's bad associate host training, or something else, but I've heard it enough about one particular firm that it seems to be a trend. Gives a very shitty appearance.

[sapsipper]

For what it's worth, I had a friend who got their Day 3 interview rescinded this evening. I don't think firms do it on purpose, probably just some bad miscommunication or deliberation on their part, but I can imagine that it still sucks a lot for them to suddenly lose that opportunity. 

[lawstudent69]

50 minutes ago, Peculiar Frond said:

It’s neither here nor there, but @ZukoJD, a firm did this to me many years ago. After all this time, I still can’t bring myself to show that firm any more respect than they showed me.

You’re right to be upset. I’m still flabbergasted that any firm would of treat obviously smart, well qualified, future colleagues and business partners that way. You’ll go on to have a great career and, in the long run, in a real sense, this is their loss. 

Is there a chance you could share which firms did this? I think a lot of us would love to know. Recruiters/firms should know that behaving this way has consequences. This process really seems like there’s too much power in the firms’ hands. (Especially with this “first choice” nonsense) 

[Ke2]

Is anyone meeting with BLG today? I heard they don't do 3rd rounds, but that last year they had a social event on day 3 for top candidates. Anyone hear anything?

[helloall]

12 hours ago, lawstudent69 said:

Is there a chance you could share which firms did this? I think a lot of us would love to know.

I really wish this forum would allow anonymous posts for these sorts of situations. As neurotic and cynical as TLS is, it's great that they can actually out the shitty behaviour of firms.

[QueensDenning]

17 minutes ago, helloall said:

I really wish this forum would allow anonymous posts for these sorts of situations.

Pretty sure there is an anon option on here now. 

13 hours ago, QMT20 said:

It'll be ok. People I know and some of the people on this forum fell through the cracks during recruit. Ultimately, they still got to where they wanted to be. 

You'll have to hustle more than if you landed in the recruit. But there's light at the end of the tunnel. 

This is so true (and was my situation). If 2L OCI's don't work out, keep grinding and it'll all work out in the end. 

[123]

45 minutes ago, helloall said:

I really wish this forum would allow anonymous posts for these sorts of situations. As neurotic and cynical as TLS is, it's great that they can actually out the shitty behaviour of firms.

There is an anonymous posting function.

I don't own the forum. If I did, I'm not sure I would be comfortable facilitating anonymous and unverifiable allegations against specific firms and individuals. I get that it's appealing from a user perspective. I don't know if it makes sense from Ryn's perspective.

[IacobucciFanGirl]

1 hour ago, Ke2 said:

Is anyone meeting with BLG today? I heard they don't do 3rd rounds, but that last year they had a social event on day 3 for top candidates. Anyone hear anything?

Yes, I have a friend attending a top candidate event today with BLG 

[Peculiar Frond]

12 hours ago, lawstudent69 said:

Is there a chance you could share which firms did this? I think a lot of us would love to know. Recruiters/firms should know that behaving this way has consequences. This process really seems like there’s too much power in the firms’ hands. (Especially with this “first choice” nonsense) 

I don’t feel like it’s helpful or productive to throw bombs in the middle of a stressful time for applicants.   I emphasize that my (anecdotal) experience was a while ago.  Publicly shaming the firm in question will not meaningfully alter the total mix of information available to students today without recent corroboration.  I doubt that is forthcoming for quite understandable reasons.  

I agree wholeheartedly that the Toronto recruit is deeply flawed.  I encourage people affected by similar bad conduct to speak with your friends, CDO, whoever.