'Nobody Is Recruiting Over the Summer': OCI Season Postponed
Moving on-campus interviews from late summer into late fall or early winter will give students some breathing room and give law firms some time to better assess their hiring needs, career services deans say.
April 02, 2020 at 12:47 PM
6 minute read
|
Law firms won't be recruiting summer associates in late July and early August this year.
All but one of the so-called T-14 law schools by Thursday had announced postponements to their on-campus interview programs due to the coronavirus pandemic, and a growing number in the top 50 of the U.S. News & World Report rankings have followed suit.
Columbia Law School, which sends a higher number of graduates into associate jobs at large firms than any other school, became the first to postpone OCI on March 23. But the movement picked up steam this week when Harvard Law School, New York University School of Law and the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School joined the list of campuses delaying summer associate recruiting. Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law is the one T-14 school that hasn't yet announced a delay.
"Nobody is recruiting over the summer," said Harvard career services Dean Mark Weber. "It's off the table. I think January will become the new August."
The delays are the result of numerous factors, but law firms initiated the push to hold off on recruiting programs that bring partners to campus for hundreds of screening interviews with incoming 2Ls.
First, it's not clear that those in-person interviews will even be possible in the late summer if social distancing rules remain in effect.
Second, firms are already dealing with significant economic fallout of the pandemic and uncertainty of their futures and staff needs. The past two weeks have brought news of law firms laying off staff and associates, withholding partner pay and furloughing associates. That means hiring summer associates who will go on to become the firm's new associate class in 2022 would come at a time when firms know little about what their staffing needs will be two years ahead of time. If firms moved ahead with hiring over the summer, they'd likely hire half as many summer associates, Weber noted.
Third, many law firms have delayed the start of their upcoming summer associate programs, pushing them later into the summer. They do not have the desire or the capabilities to simultaneously run those programs—many of which will now be completed remotely—while also juggling summer associate recruiting.
And finally, most Big Law feeder schools have adopted pass/fail grading for the spring semester. Law firms want to see at least two semesters of grades when making summer associate hiring decisions. Delaying the hiring process should give them more than one semester of grades to evaluate.
"I firmly believe that the January schedule is the best solution to this current problem," said Gavin White, the global hiring partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. "I'd go further and say that I hope we can continue with the January schedule in future years."
White said he has not heard any law school say that it intends to hold summer associates interview programs in July or August, though not all have committed to a January timetable.
Yale Law School, Stanford Law School, the University of Chicago Law School, the University of Michigan Law School and Duke Law School are among the schools that have told students that OCI is postponed until late fall or early 2021, but have not committed to a more specific timetable. Other schools, including Columbia, Harvard, NYU, the University of Virginia School of Law and the University of California, Berkeley School of Law have said OCI will now be in January.
Still others, including Georgetown University Law Center and the University of California at Los Angeles School of Law, have said January or February are both under consideration.
"I know that our law school and legal employer members are actively working through the impact of the current situation on summer programs and recruiting plans," said James Leipold, executive director of the National Association for Law Placement. "During the current state of civil emergency, the NALP board of directors does not believe that there can be uniform solutions that will serve all institutions, but they do believe firmly that there are a multiplicity of solutions that will preserve the fundamental values of fairness, access, and transparency to which NALP is committed."
Weber said that most students at Harvard welcomed Tuesday's news that the summer associate recruiting program will be delayed until January.
"Most students really appreciated the move," he said. "It's one less thing for them to worry about."
In its email to students last week announcing the delay of summer associate interview, Chicago's career services office noted some advantages to the new winter recruiting schedule.
"This has many benefits for you, including giving you more time to research employers, to explore practice areas through research and classes, and to work with us on your job search strategies," the email reads.
Postponing OCI essentially gives both students and law firms some time and breathing room to make plans amid the rapidly changing situation, and the delay gives the pandemic time to subside before hiring takes place, Weber noted. Even under that rosy scenario, career services offices are bracing for hiring slowdowns.
"We know next year won't have the same kind of robust hiring that we've seen for the past two years," Weber said. "That's not hard to figure out."
But Berkeley Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky wrote in an email to students Monday that delaying OCI until January gives them the best possible chance at securing a summer associate position under the difficult circumstances brought on by the coronavirus outbreak.
"Employers will have a much better sense of their hiring needs in January than in August and there is reason to hope that they will be able to do more hiring at the later time," he wrote. "Most of all, it is clear that employers would prefer this shift."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'What Is Certain Is Uncertainty': Patchwork Title IX Rules Face Expected Changes in Second Trump Administration
5 minute read'No Evidence'?: Big Law Firms Defend Academic Publishers in EDNY Antitrust Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1'There is No Time to Waste': Matt Gaetz Withdraws From AG Nomination
- 2The Growing PFAS Morass: Why Insurance Should Cover These Products Liability Claims
- 3Dallas Jury Awards $98.65M in Botham Jean Killing by Dallas Officer
- 4In Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
- 5Pharmaceutical Patents: Benefits and Challenges
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250