Foleydog's blog

Attorneys need not apply

Today, I was looking at job ads categorized under 'legal' -- and most of the descriptions explicitly say, "Attorneys need not apply."  I'm seeing this is more and more ads for job. 

I guess in this tight economy, attorneys, like myself who were told in law school our degree was an asset, because we could tackle anything are applying for jobs outside their immediate field.

With almost one million lawyers in California and what seems like three jobs, we're branching out.  Unsuccessfully for the most part, I may add.  To increase my chances, I've taken an unprecedented step.

I've finally done it despite years of threats. 

I've taken my law degree off my resume. 

For years, it's been a hindrance.

Two years ago, an executive at Fox looked me directly in the eye during an interview and said, "I hate that attorneys think they can come in here and do our jobs just because they went to law school."

Needless to say, I didn't get a call back from her.

Now, it's deleted.  It's gone.  Like it was never was there -- despite the one hundred thousand dollars plus interest, I'm still struggling to pay off.

I haven't gotten any response to my new lighter resume, but it has to be more positive than my current resume.

Just yesterday, and my millionth job interview in Los Angeles, I spent many minutes assuring my interviewers that even though I didn't take a class in administrative law, and I never worked in finance, that I could grasp the concept of administrative hearings and could read financial documents and other balance sheets.  Those seven years in Ivy League schools must have been worth something, right?

I'm not entirely sure they were convinced, but I found out they hired many more non-attorneys than attorneys.  I may have had a better chance at the job without that J.D. on my resume.

Who knew?

The hatred of lawyers has spilled over into other industries -- and it's not pretty.

Four years ago a friend of mine was hiring folks for her company.  She said when she got resumes from attorneys, she threw them out immediately.  "What do they know about my business?" she asked.  Now this didn't stop her calling me for free advice when she had a legal problem related to that job, but I digress.

My response?  "What could I know about your business?" and a shrug.

Now that Cornell Law School  has gone by the wayside -- maybe I can save myself from the round file.

Only time will tell.

On the Job Hunt (or is it snipe hunting)

Ah, yes it continues . . . the Job Quest . . . now that should be a reality show, but as always I digress.

Now that my latest stint as a temporary attorney is over, I'm back on the job search scene with a vengeance.

My first stop:  Networking with friends.  Now this seems to work for others, but not me.  One friend, a legal recruiter, said, "But Jessica, I read your blog, and looked at your pictures, your so talented, it seems you could do something with that -- not practicing law."  Lovely, I thought, maybe it's talent that's keeping me from getting a job.

Another friend, who's always talking about how his fledgling company has gone from five to five hundred employees -- practically overnight says, "Are you still looking for a job?"  Gee, I thought, you must have thrown away all those e-mails I sent you offering to work for your fledgling company.

My second stop: a non-profit organization whose goal it is to place 'qualified' minorities in the industry.  The recruiter/placement person sat critiquing resumes during our career strategies workshop.  "You shouldn't have your high school on the resume," he said to one woman.  "More bullet points." he said to another.  He read mine to the group and they actually oohed and aahed -- and really I'm not patting my self on the back, but for some reason, non lawyer folks think being a lawyer is impressive (when they're not cursing your name and calling you ambulance chasers) -- and he said, "Oh, you should have no problem getting a position with these credentials."

Ironically that's exactly what my career counselor said fifteen months ago -- and yet here I am marching toward death -- with no unemployment benefits.

My third stop:  Again, I got a phone call from a potential employer who saw my resume on CalJobs (and yes, now that I have no unemployment, I'm deleting that resume).  Looking for in house counsel, he said, paying at least $72,000 a year.  The downside, he was located in Chino, CA.  For folks who didn't watch the first season of The O.C., Chino is about 50 miles east of Los Angeles, In San Bernardino county -- ok, really, the desert.  And just to put it in perspective, it takes about 45 minutes to travel 10 miles during rush hour.

So, being the trooper I am, I braved the long drive on four freeways, in 100 degree heat (it's a dry heat) to meet with the folks from this Chino company.  Of course, because, really my luck is this way, this Chino company is of course one man, about ninety, with one crazy litigation matter against the State of California, that no lawyer would take.  His idea was to maybe employ someone part time to work, in his family room, on his one case.

Now, on the drive back, I pondered how this would look on my already hodge podge resume, and things weren't looking so good.  So I was saved? from making a decision about this case when I got a 'no' first thing this morning.

The job quest marches on.

At a Crossroads

So a fellow permanent temp sent me an e-mail this weekend . . . another opportunity to work at a large firm which pays it's regular attorneys $150,000 -- but will pay us a whopping $30 an hour to do the work that's beneath those attorneys.

When you have no job and not many prospects it's very tempting, but is it a good idea?

According to conventional career wisdom (see here), it doesn't move you forward any in your career, and in fact, will likely cause permanent detriment to your long term employment plans.  You know how it is -- people to pay you to wash their floors, and they can't see you doing anything more than washing their floors -- not even washing the windows.

Adam's idea, of course, is to take a sabbatical.  Maybe some time off, he says, will help me focus on things other than jobs, and more elusively a career.  I can, you know, hang curtains, supervise the painting of our interior, train the dogs . . . .

Several dictionaries define sabbatical as a leave from employment, a time to pursue a concentrated course of study.  Now if one doesn't really have employment, how is a sabbatical not just an excuse to sit at home eating bon bons?

In some world where money didn't matter at all (and those student loan people weren't barking down your neck every month for their fifteen hundred dollars -- nine years out of school) -- it would be a downright charming idea.

Downright charming.

The Job Interview -- Part 2

I've hit a low point in my professional life.  Just recently I returned the book Earn What You're Worth (another career guide) to the library.  Why?  Because all these 'career' books assume you have one thing I don't have . . . a job.

So yesterday, it is with some trepidation, I went for a job interview at a firm which recruited me from the unemployment rolls.

Now, I'm a good little investigator, and I was suspicious, because jobs in the legal community are hard to come by and searching the unemployment rolls is certainly an 'unorthodox' method of recruitment.

And where there's smoke . . . . Last Friday saw me running (ok, driving in start/stop traffic) from the West L.A. Public Library to the Beverly Hills Public Library, to Google, to blogs.

Long story short.  In January a partner in the firm was arrested at home, charged with embezzling a half a million dollars from a client, and is also facing a malpractice suit as a result of the same case.  With that kind of matter brewing, of course, the firm lost a lucrative worker's compensation contract from the city (a controversial matter for another reason), and laid off most of it's 28 employees.  And, of course, it's a minority firm, only adding to my embarrassment for them.

So, it's with this knowledge that I face this interview with the surviving partner.  In the first moments of the interview, of course, I was asked about the latest article in the state bar journal about minority 'success' at large majority firms.  But, of course, this woman having gone to Harvard (why do Harvard graduates feel the need to mention this in the first ten seconds of acquaintance?) knew that minority superstars in her class were doing well.

What I wondered as I looked at her office, drowning in paper, was how she saw herself?  But enough analysis.  Of course, they're looking for hard workers (billing 2400 hours a year?!) who are willing to work for smallish (I assume) pay.  Because they're all working twice as hard . . . yada, yada, you know the drill.

Anyway, I'll shoot off my thank you letter and writing sample.  It all makes me sad for me, minority lawyers, the legal profession in general . . . .

The Job Interview

After eight full months of unsuccessful job seeking, I had the oddest phone call yesterday.  Some small law firm has found my resume on the state's unemployment site and they're interested in interviewing me. 

Now, I believe that I'm obligated to do this interview -- especially if I want to squeeze my remaining $1251.24 from the state's unemployment fund.

Is this job, you ask, in my desired niche of television?  No, of course not.  Those folks don't need to advertise.  Rather, it's a job that many consider scraping the bottom of the legal employment battle -- worker's compensation.  Now Worker's Comp is the bastard step-cousin of the world of plaintiff's work.  You may know them as ambulance chasers.  I know them as hard working folks who don't make much money except when they stumble on the odd tobacco or breast implant litigation -- despite what George Bush said when signing legislation to close those judicial 'hellholes.'  But, as always, I digress.

This is an interesting position to be in.  I've already had the dead end legal job, and here I am interviewing for another.  After all, an attorney describes worker's comp this way:

I interviewed with a W/C defense firm that wanted me to bill 2000 hours per year for the princely sum of $50k. I didn't stick around to hear the details.

These firms make their money by handling cases in volume. Large volume. All the defense firms' offices I have visited look the same. Files everywhere, like someone took a file cannon and shot files all over the office - giant, stuffed redweld files, bulging with doctors' reports and with the case name written in magic marker on the front. (Confidentiality be damned!)

Add to all of this the fact that reform legislation passed last year might actually be successful in reducing W/C litigation - and you have a field that I wouldn't enter except as a last resort. Also, consider the fact that once you enter this area of practice, it could be very hard to practice any other type of law.

Now, this last $1251 comes with strings, no?

So, the good Googler that I am, I've done some research.  The firm's manager is a Harvard Law graduate.  Now that's interesting . . . .   I suspet there's more to this story.  Not many of those folks eeking it out on their own, searching unemployment sites for attorneys.  There myst be some real story here, but I have a meeting this evening.  I can't decide what tact I'm going to take, but after I battle traffic on the 101, it should be very interesting . . . .

The System

I am always so easily fooled.

I actually got dressed for this.  I took off my jeans and put on ‘dry clean only’ pants.

Yes, you guessed it.  It was my unemployment interview.  The letter boldly states that they are interested in asking about my job pursuit goals and that indeed they have job assistance resources.  Ok, I was skeptical of the latter, but somewhat sure of the former.  So, put on my clean pants and drove 26 miles round trip – which in Los Angeles is no mean feat – witnessed a horrific car accident, and arrived on time.

Now, I love government offices, the orderliness of crinkling papers and signs in three different languages asking me to form one line.  The third language was Russian, a difference from my old neighborhood where the third language was always Korean, but I digress.

So, I get in line and when my name is called, I expect to be whisked away to some cubicle – as Jason DeParle described in American Dream – when the book’s subjects were applying for welfare.

What they wanted, however, was far different than the lofty letter’s goals.  They wanted two pieces of ID.  I demurred, and gave them my passport which I now carry like a European.  Then the lovely lady at the front desk – no cubicle treatment for me, my friends, with the painted on eyebrows, informs me that really, they just want to see me and my government issued ID in person to verify that I’m not defrauding the government of their $206.00 weekly taxable benefits.

Ok, and was I looking for a job.  Yes, I said.  Well, she said, since the big vast bureaucracy of a government can’t verify that I’m looking for employment, I should just log in to the unemployment website once per week to meet that requirement.

And for the much ballyhooed advice about looking for a job.  A printed list of websites that have job openings.  Time to drive to and from appointment in traffic clogged Los Angeles – two hours.  Time to verify that I’m not defrauding the state of California and give me the key to milking the system – five minutes.

An MBA! The solution!

Another degree?  You’ve got to be kidding!  I’m still owe $60,000 on this one.

Those were my thoughts this week.  In my feeble attempt at networking, I mentioned to someone that I was looking for a job.  “Ah,” he said, sagely.  “What you really need is an MBA.”  And he wasn’t the first one to suggest it.

Apparently, I can get one in my spare time at UCLA.

On the one hand, I can see their point – more degrees = greater access to employment.  On the other hand – are they kidding?!?  I went to the well regarded, New England, sister school.  I got a graduate degree from the well regarded Ivy League school – and that’s not enough?

Lately, I’ve been lamenting – or myopically dwelling as Adam puts it – on my career – or lack thereof.  Like the folks before me who thought getting a job at IBM was a job for life – I, perhaps naively, thought that getting a degree would be the equivalent of a full employment guarantee.

A plethora of articles in the Village Voice (Generation Debt series), and L.A. Times (New Deal series) have all but cured me of that belief.

In the early 1900s most Americans were self-employed.  I think, in some sense, we’re moving toward that again.  Many of my friends and acquaintances are freelancing or consulting – or however you want to describe working for employers who pay low hourly wages with no benefits – but as professional contractors – we should be grateful, I suppose.  The full time, full benefit job is elusive for many.  We’re paying our own health insurance, self-employment taxes, and consider ourselves lucky.

Looking at the Los Angeles Magazine – in an article suggesting a college degree is the minimum needed to possibly secure gainful employment -- it appears that the college degree will soon be ubiquitous.

Now, I stand by my promise that I wont be getting any more education – I can’t afford it.  In this capitalist society, however, the question remains as to when will it come to it that I can’t not afford to get that next degree . . . .

Where do they go?

I was watching the local news coverage of unionized hotel workers and their possible strike/lock-out, when I noticed the demographics of those workers. They looked a lot like the demographics of temporary attorneys. In the last year, I have taken temporary attorney work. In theory, it's a great way to supplement my income and keep my toe in the water while I pursue that entertainment career. When I was in law school, I looked around at the members of my class often -- after all what was one to do during those dry classes -- and I noticed that about two thirds of our class was male, and our class was mostly white with a sprinkling of african-americans, asians, latinos, and one native american woman. On job interviews for 'legal' employment, however, ninety-nine percent of the attorneys and interviewers were white men. Sure there was an occasional woman attorney -- and I never saw those minority attorneys they touted in statistics. So, I always wondered -- where did the white women and racial minority attorneys disappear to? Clearly, we were sitting together in class, but I didn't see their numbers represented in the mainstream legal employers. My first thought was that we primarily were slotted into public interest firms. Interviewing with large public interest employers like the ACLU and legal aid dispelled that notion. Those were as white and male as their privately employed white shoe counterparts. Maybe, government, I thought. Interviews there showed a better minority representation, but not enough folks to justify the gap. Then, I entered the world of temporary employment. As I sit in meetings for my latest project -- I think I've finally come upon the answer. To work on this large scale legal project -- the law firm has hired twenty attorneys -- of whom two are white and male. The rest are all the people I haven't seen for years. There we are working for a quarter of the pay of the attorneys who are supervising the team. Meeting after meeting, the law firm's best and brightest explain all the 'difficult' concepts to us and I'm amazed at how things have shaken out. Now, I know where we went.

Dating vs. Job Searching

He doesn't write, he doesn't call. I wonder if our first meeting was good. Did I have spinach between my teeth? Did I wear the right clothes? Did I dominate the conversation too much. I wanted him to get to know me, but did I ask enough questions about him and his job? I sit by the phone waiting for it to ring. I check the dial tone, everything's good there. I check my e-mail . . . nothing. I've been trying to get friends to set me up. I've met some nice guys, but nothing's clicked. Maybe, in the immortal words of the writers of 'Sex in the City.' he's just not that into me. And I thought dating was bad . . . but, job hunting is worse. For the life of me, I feel like a constant pursuer. I call, I e-mail, I write letters!, and I visit. I dress up, act nice, give compliments. Dating, was never a problem, men respond to the above. Potential bosses, however, I can't get a rise out of them. And I'm even getting better at taking rejection. Many of my single friends have turned to on-line dating. They have match.com, I have monster.com. Dating, is easier, I think. There seem to be an infinite number of eligible people to meet. Jobs, however, are a lot scarcer. If you and another person decide to date, you can have a one on one relationship. Interviewing is more competitive -- duking it out against invisible rivals -- and in a capalist country -- those rivals can number in the hundreds. Single friends, take heart, dating is a lot easier.

The Mailroom

Today, I found myself in the mailroom of one of the biggest talent agenies in Los Angeles. I was dropping off some tickets for a friend of mine who works there. It wasn't quite like the ride from the House of Representative office building to the Capitol, but it's pretty close in terms of future power brokers. The mailrooms in Los Angeles are legendary. Some of the most powerful movers and shakers in L.A. began in the mailroom. Whether it's at an agency or studio, many have gotten their start that way. With college degrees, MBAs, and JDs in hand, many have resorted to delivering mail in order to get their crack at the top. For some it works, they become an assistant (read secretary/slave) to an executive, and if they're lucky, after a few years of hard work, they may become an executive themselves. The other day I received a copy of my Social Security earnings record. I got out my calculator and added up the numbers. The bad news, is that I've earned a whopping $58,640 dollars in my life. That's from the age of 15 in 1997 until today. The worse news; I earned a majority of that money before I graduated from college. After almost $150,000 of education, and consequently $200,000 of debt, I'm not sure I'm getting my money's worth. And now, for the zillionth time in my life, I'm embarking on a new career search. The question? Should I try to get a job in the mailroom or as an 'assistant' in order to make my way to the top? As you can imagine with monthly student loan payments that exceeed my mortgage, I'm more than eager to begin earning a living -- but without experience, it's difficult to get a job -- you know, the original Catch 22. I won't get 'experience' until I get a job. Until now, I've eschewed the mailroom, but, knowing it could double my lifetime earnings in a year or so, it's beginning to look attractive . . . after all Mike Ovitz had to start somewhere.