Whirlpool

Hi all,

Just wanted to share an experience I had over the weekend:

So I applied for a law clerk job advertised on my University's careers website (I'm a penultimate year law student) at a small inner city firm. Interviewed really well with the principal who seemed to love me. Good 45 minute chat about law and life etc. It sounded like they wanted someone for the long term.

Next day (last Fri, about 5pm) the Office Manager calls me up saying "Daniel (not his real name obviously) absolutely raved about you. When can you work? We want to offer you this job". I said I could work as soon as possible, so they asked me to come in Tuesday (today) morning at 9am, together with my bank and super details etc.

Great, I thought, a good job that will also provide me with some experience working in a firm.

With this in mind across the weekend I (1) buy two suits, since I don't have any that aren't covered in ball scum or are suitable for work, have the pants altered on both (2) buy a pair of new shoes & a bag (3) change around all my subjects so that I am free Mon-Wed (when they wanted me to work) (4) reject a second round interview at a separate firm who had also seemed really keen on me.

All up i'd say I spent between $1500-2000 getting ready for this job, figuring it was stuff I needed for corporate life anyway.

Monday (yesterday) I get a call at 4pm – it's the office manager again – "Oh sorry, we have had a look at our workload and...ummmm... we don't have a position for you anymore". I pressed her a little because I couldn't believe what I was hearing and all she could say was that they had decided they didn't want to take on someone new.

So the end result is I am left with a mangled timetable, severe expenditure, and no possibility of getting the other job.

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

Really the money isn't such a big deal, but I feel like I was really dicked around, particularly since I missed out on the other job and these things aren't easy to come by.

Wow..
I feel sorry for you..
Very very unprofessional and obviously very unorganised.

If you had 2 firms raving about you, im sure youll have no problems finding another job. Plus, you now have corporate attire! :D

lachyzee writes...

that aren't covered in ball scum

<blink> maybe I misinterpret?

All up i'd say I spent between $1500-2000
on 2 suits, a pair of shoes and a bag? sounds like you got ripped buddy :)

Anyway, bad luck on the job thing. chin up.. wear your suit to the pub.

Blaman writes...

on 2 suits, a pair of shoes and a bag? sounds like you got ripped buddy :)

I believe you are quite misinformed when it comes to suits.

That's disgusting.

No chance with the other place any more?

Well it sounds like you are still very "hot property" and maybe even more so now with the suits so I would say hopefully you'll get another job soon – keep looking – in the meantime any chance of getting your timetable to something more acceptable?

Did you sign a contract? If not, you really don't have a leg to stand on :/

The behaviour of the company is reprehensible, but if they're that disorganised you have to wonder if it would be a good place to work anyway.

My cynical guess would be that after they 'offered' you the job and then suddenly someone in the office's relative wanted a job too and you got trumped. Would explain the hesitancy of the office manager.

On the bright side, you can always use the suits for the next (hopefully better!) job.

Blaman writes...

lachyzee writes...that aren't covered in ball scum

<blink> maybe I misinterpret?

He's at uni.
Every suit he owns is for going to uni balls (ie: has had more drinks and other unmentionable on this website spilled all over them).

lachyzee writes...

reject a second round interview at a separate firm who had also seemed really keen on me.

Next time: Postpone not reject?

Sounds terrible, but you should probably use this as a great opportunity to learn that you never count your chickens before the eggs have hatched.

Don't ever spend a cent of your money towards a new/possible job unless you've signed that contract of employment. Ever. Even then, spend cautiously because there is usually always a trial/probationary period at the start of any job where you can be kicked to the curb for almost anything, at any given time, too.

TeepKick writes...

Sounds terrible, but you should probably use this as a great opportunity to learn that you never count your chickens before the eggs have hatched.

+1

I never do anything before I've seen, read and signed the contract. Otherwise you don't know what could happen

So were you given a letter of offer or anything similar?

Blaman writes...

on 2 suits, a pair of shoes and a bag? sounds like you got ripped buddy :)

When you dont buy your suits at Lowes or Best & Less like you obviously do- $1500 sounds like a bargain for a couple of decent suits, shoes and bag.

Name and shame?

Shocker of a story, although as mentioned, you will need the gear for presentation and work anyway.
A good good suit costs at least what you spent on the lot (probably double?) so provided you've got some sense of style, you probably got a lot of bang for your buck there?
I can certainly understand the decision to get a decent new suit prior to starting.

Don't they teach you anything about employment contracts at Uni?

Blaman writes...

if you really think an entry level position requires a $700 suit then you need to stop playing with yourself.

There's no reason a law student might not think that, even if it is wrong. Chances are something closer to Lowes would have been acceptable (no I'm not saying Lowes, just closer to $200 than $700).

lol at the posters who buy their suits at Lowes.

ZAK248313 writes...

that $1500 isnt really that much for decent shoes, bag and a couple of suits.

geez... my suit alone costed nearly $3k.. maybe I got ripped.. DAMN YOU STORE!!! DAMN YOU!!!

OT however, it does sound very unprofessional – usually organisations wait until they've assessed headcount and forecast/projections. If they haven't done it properly, they'd usually put the position on hold before they offered anyone a role...

Blitzkrieger writes...

lol at the posters who buy their suits at Lowes.

this.

it is very very very very obvious when someone has bought a $100 suit from lowes or somewhere else dodgy. don't do it unless you want to be seen as cheap. i spent $250 on a nice suit jacket and pants and they look very professional. all of this $1000+ crap is only if you're on a 6fig salary and have money to blow. it's stupid.

it looks like the person who "loved" you so much wasn't ultimately in charge of who got hired. could have been that one of the higher ups had a son/nephew/pet rock that wanted the job and it went to them.

time to move onto the next job.

D3m3nti4 writes...

geez... my suit alone costed nearly $3k.. maybe I got ripped.. DAMN YOU STORE!!! DAMN YOU!!!

no you didn't get ripped off. but you did spend too much on a suit unless you're working at a very prestigeous place where appearance is worth more than anything else.

Make sure you feed this back to your faculty coordinator so others don't get stung. Perhaps your Uni will revise their wanting to associate with this this firm in the future.

A law student accepting a job offer without signing a contract...

Who would have thunk it..

P.S Just kigding, this sucks.. But you live and learn.

Thanks for all the replies. Perhaps I should have renamed the thread something more appropriate such as "how much do I spend on new suits for work?".

Anyway to clarify the first, and, seemingly, most important point, I shopped at Jack London for suits & shirts, some were on sale, some were not. In my opinion, they make very well fitted and reasonably priced clothing. Some of it is more geared towards indie formal wear/going out, but they do have some more demure jackets and pants in there.

Of course it's not going to be as good as a tailored suit, but it's also far less expensive (don't forget i'm a student), so for my needs I can't complain. Had the pants taken in a little at Henry Buck's too. I wanted something a bit more fitted and modern than a Lowes/Peter Jackson suit, hence why I spent a bit more money.

2 suits half price & some shirts – ~$1200, shoes ~$300, bag ~$200 and a hundred or so on new course materials.

Lowes < Jack London < Tailors etc.

I obviously wasn't given a letter of offer, didn't sign anything etc. It was a phone conversation. I just thought I could trust that I'd be able to show up on Tues as stated!

I don't think it's unreasonable to purchase stuff for the job on reliance of the verbal offer/promise/whatever you want to call it.

I can't exactly go in in shorts and a t shirt and tell them I refuse to work until I sign a contract!

As everyone has said, I will need this stuff eventually anyway, so it's not a total loss.

Luckily I was called back this morning by the other firm who still want to interview me, so fingers crossed for that.

I don't really feel like it'd be appropriate to name them, it's just a small construction law firm. I spoke to the careers office today and they said they'd be very reticent about taking any more advertisements from them, so hopefully this won't happen to anyone else!

**Oh yeah – as someone stated earlier, ball scum = dirt/drinks/vomit/etc. from uni balls. Also the black stuff that somehow gets on your shoes....

Least you got offered a job. I don't even get offered an interview.

lachyzee writes...

Luckily I was called back this morning by the other firm who still want to interview me, so fingers crossed for that.

That's excellent news, and now you have just the right gear to wear as well. Good luck to you in getting a better position.

danchurchill123 writes...

it is very very very very obvious when someone has bought a $100 suit from lowes or somewhere else dodgy. don't do it unless you want to be seen as cheap. i spent $250 on a nice suit jacket and pants and they look very professional. all of this $1000+ crap is only if you're on a 6fig salary and have money to blow. it's stupid.

Why spend $100 at Lowes when Rivers has suits for just $38!

Thanks for all the replies. Perhaps I should have renamed the thread something more appropriate such as "how much do I spend on new suits for work?".
Some of us like to concentrate on the main game you know!

lachyzee writes...

Luckily I was called back this morning by the other firm who still want to interview me, so fingers crossed for that.

Here is some good news. Hope this one pans out for you, without having to totally revisit your uni timetable for a second time.

Which firm? I'm curious :)

All jokes aside, shouldn't you sue them? You turned down other work, incurred expenditure on the basis of their offer....sounds awfully first year equity law to me.

lachyzee writes...

how much do I spend on new suits for work?

made me lol

danchurchill123 writes...

it is very very very very obvious when someone has bought a $100 suit from lowes or somewhere else dodgy

I 100% agree, just like shirts – you can always spot a cheap shirt because it looks like the guy is swimming in it.

But at the same time you dont want to over do it, someone I worked with used to occasionally wear a $1000 suit to work, he made about $40k per year, looked stupid as – most people would just go pants and a shirt, maybe a jumper... not like he is the CEO.

Anyway, back on topic.

@lachyzee:

Doesnt sound like it was worth working there in the end does it?

Hope it all goes well at the other place.

pootle writes...

My cynical guess would be that after they 'offered' you the job and then suddenly someone in the office's relative wanted a job too and you got trumped. Would explain the hesitancy of the office manager.

I'd think highly likely.

Vaporware jobs are very common in Australia and Australian employers have an international reputation for being (as a whole) volatile.

It will be interesting to see what happens in the next few months as the market for skilled people heats up. It won't be long before we see more Australian employers crying about the shortage of skilled people.

About a year ago I had a job in Australia turn vaporware on me. However I had been paid relocation expenses and advance salary up front so the nett effect to me was a paid 3 week shopping holiday for me.

I went back home and resumed my old job that I had been in for several years.

lachyzee writes...

So the end result is I am left with a mangled timetable, severe expenditure, and no possibility of getting the other job.

The old saying is to never take anything as concrete or do anything to disrupt your life if there is no signature on the paper.

Sydney Garrie writes...

Next time: Postpone not reject?

Thats pretty harsh. If someone says you have the job you dont assume your gonna get laid off over the weekend

At least you've learnt something from this awful experience. Next time wait until you've received the contract, signed it, and ensure they've receved it before you reject an interview or another offer. The same applies for when you leave a firm.

lachyzee writes...

shoes ~$300

hope they are self cleaning shoes. or at least make your bed while your in the shower... gawd.

so many people thinking that their fancy expensive clothes make up for their lack of skill. oh well.

ps: what is lowes? i get that its a shop...

ball scum = dirt/drinks/vomit/etc. from uni balls

I get that your still at uni... but even uni students should know what a washing machine is. ask your mum for goodness sake.

Don't worry lachyzee. Blaman's idea of style and fashion is the bargain bin at Big W.

Seedy writes...

....sounds awfully first year equity law to me.

Even if you make a case out for estoppel, practicality would prevail. You wouldn't force them to hire you and you wouldn't put good money in to get back a measley $1,500. This is one of those matters where you just rue your bad luck and move on.

Plus, he didn't technically lose anything really. He got suits, shoes and a bag, which he will need sooner or later.

dont have big W where I live, only K-Mart.

Blaman writes...

hope they are self cleaning shoes. or at least make your bed while your in the shower... gawd.

i got $900 louis vuitton black sneakers on right now as a matter of fact to go with my white target shirt and trousers that i picked up in another job

lachyzee writes...

So the end result is I am left with a mangled timetable, severe expenditure, and no possibility of getting the other job.

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

Welcome to the real world. Next time, I suggest for you not to spend money without any guarantee.

I definitely agree, it's extremely unprofessional and unethical but at the end of the day – it's their decision and in this world, the most important person IS???

you

OP, I suggest you get a blog :)

As others have said, it's a good idea to hold off a little on splashing out on clothes and rearranging your life for a job you've never attended (let alone signed a contract for).

Anyway, good luck with the other job.

ZAK248313 writes...

lol- Where did I say an entry level position requires a $700 suit? Suggest you go back to year 1 and learn how to read again.

Will re-iterate again for those a little slow (ie: Blaman) that $1500 isnt really that much for decent shoes, bag and a couple of suits.

If the total cost was $1500-2000, two suits at $700 each sounds reasonable.

lachyzee writes...

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

You got that right. It's crazy that they did that to you :(

If you're spending that much on suits and shoes, why did you not get a briefcase instead of a bag? :)

Blitzkrieger writes...

lol at the posters who buy their suits at Lowes.

Would someone be able to easily tell that it is from Lowes?--lol :)

I doubt it would be a problem :D

thats bloody ridiculous!!!

liteon writes...

I 100% agree, just like shirts – you can always spot a cheap shirt because it looks like the guy is swimming in it.

Person A: $100 suit/job

Person B: $1000 suit/no job

Which one would you select?

squirtle writes...

Person A: $100 suit/job

Person B: $1000 suit/no job

Which one would you select?

Would depend on a whole bunch of other factors. e.g. Qualifications, interpersonal skills, work history, etc.

The Zeroth writes...

Would depend on a whole bunch of other factors. e.g. Qualifications, interpersonal skills, work history, etc.

Next you will get the impossible 'what if those are all the same' line.

If you can show me two people who jobs experiences, personality, attitude, etc. are identical except for their suit is different Ill take the mirror from you and say try again.

Rogue writes...

If the total cost was $1500-2000, two suits at $700 each sounds reasonable.

Yep a decent suit costs about $500-1000 these days...

TripleGem writes...

Would someone be able to easily tell that it is from Lowes?--lol :)

I doubt it would be a problem :D

Irrespective of your abilities and potential to do the job...looking like a shit-bag at interview provides another excuse for not hiring you.

Sorry to hear about that, I would've hated that happening to me. Can you PM me who they were?

My shoes cost about $300 when I bought them 4 years ago for my first uni job. Definitely worth it, as I've treated them like crap and with a bit of polish they always look as good as new.

There is a good (albeit smarting) lesson in there about judging personalities.

As soon as you wrote the bit where the office manager said the boss 'raved about you' I got concerned.

I've noticed that people who get wildly enthusiastic about things very quickly (in this case about you) often drop them like a rock just as quickly. It seems to be a personality type sometimes seen in bosses. One minute this new guy is 'amazing', then someone else walks in the door and the focus shifts in a click of the fingers.

I find a more measured response is usually more certain. Tough lesson though – sorry to hear how you've been stung.

My brother got the job 2 days after you were let go, apperently you just sucked at your job. My brother is over the moon, its the first time he has had his own parking space and he has never been to Uni!

Now quit fooling yourself and get me a Cheeseburger meal...and UPSIZE it.

Blaman writes...

if you really think an entry level position requires a $700 suit then you need to stop playing with yourself. Its causing you to go blind.

Cheap suits look that – cheap. First impressions are important, especially when applying for work in professional and conservative areas such as law.

A more expensive suit typically means it's made from better material, is cut better and fits better.

lachyzee writes...

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

Thats law

Getting ripped off and lied to by a law firm – take it as experience as to what it will feel like for your clients for the rest of your career

lachyzee writes...

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

Unethical? A law firm? Surely not!

Sarcasm aside, put it down to a lesson learned. As much as the experience hasn't been all that pleasant, you've learnt to obtain and execute an employment contract before committing funds towards new get-up.

Ignore the comments re how much you spent on the suits. Dress for the job you want, not the job you have. In your profession setting the right impression is all important and clients notice cheap suits.

bdude writes...

Why spend $100 at Lowes when Rivers has suits for just $38!

I'd just beat up homeless people at Central Station and steal their garbage bags. That's good enough to get a job at a law firm! Right?

Blaman writes...

hope they are self cleaning shoes. or at least make your bed while your in the shower... gawd.

When you're walking into a room filled with people who make $1M p/a you can't look like you've just molested a homeless guy for his clothes. Not if you want to be taken seriously. Besides, not only do good clothes look much better than the kmart fashion range, but they last longer too.

I get that your still at uni... but even uni students should know what a washing machine is. ask your mum for goodness sake.

You've never actually washed a suit before, have you?

Logic and Reason writes...

You've never actually washed a suit before, have you?

I remember washing my first suit. Learnt a rather expensive lesson about reading labels...

IMO $38 suits at Rivers look just as good as those expensive suits. The ones in the Salvation Army stores selling for $10 look ok too.

OP $1500-$2000 for business attire and you got rejected. Burned!!! Lol.

numonex writes...

IMO $38 suits at Rivers look just as good as those expensive suits. The ones in the Salvation Army stores selling for $10 look ok too.

Well it's obvious you don't mix with the upper circles but I'll let you in on a little secret *sssh* you're half right – the days where the cheap suits being absolutely garbage are gone but they are still worlds away from something I would wear.

numonex writes...

IMO $38 suits at Rivers look just as good as those expensive suits.

I went and had a look at those suits, STRONGLY disagree, but hey the pants were a nice light fabric and $14 bargain.

I think 1000 – 2000 for a suit is extreme but I do know people who frequently purchase suits far exceeding this price, however they are the kind of people that think 3k to 5k is an acceptable price for a business lunch, its all just part of the game and if your looking to rise up the ranks fast then it cant hurt to be the most presentable junior – which includes neat hair, no over the top piercings etc.
There are however allot of very respectable looking suits around the 200 – 400 mark, and allot of $1000+ suits end up around this price range if they are last seasons stock.

Lowes suits are great to wear out if your going to get alcohol etc on it though, id much rather stain a $50 jacket and risk it at the dry cleaners than a $200.

+1 To great bargains at Salvos etc though, especially if you shop around for formal wear for enough years and begin to know what to look for.

lachyzee writes...

So I applied for a law clerk job advertised on my University's careers website (I'm a penultimate year law student) at a small inner city firm.

I'm damn sure that it is illegal to advertise a position without a position actually being available. Think Ch7 or 9 was prosecuted about 10yrs ago for this very thing (stupid tv show where "new employees" are put in stupid situations.)

Anyhow, I think you would be hard pressed to get any action. As they could say CFC and all would be forgiven. Secondly, taking any action (legal or otherwise) would most likely sour your chances within the industry, and starting out is not the sort of disadvantage you want.

I suggest that you contact the principle (ignore the office manager, they only push stationary and organise crap). Let him know that you are disappointed with the companies decision (and possibly their dis-organisation) but would be keen to do work for them should things change in the future.

DrE

Personally, I like to keep a tally of these people and companies that I would like to "squash like a bug" for future reference. Then if I have work that would suit them in the future I ignore companies that were involved in unprofessional behaviour.

Mud Guts writes...

A more expensive suit typically means it's made from better material, is cut better and fits better.

No way.
An off the rack suit is an off the rack suit: it costs what it costs regardless of how well it fits the person buying it.

If you're comparing tailored suits then fine.

got to love whirlpool!! A post that discuss how a person got screwed out of a job turns into a discussion about suits!! Love it :)

Corkz writes...

Now quit fooling yourself and get me a Cheeseburger meal...and UPSIZE it.

Fatty.

Rene Rivkin writes...

Don't they teach you anything about employment contracts at Uni?

Yep, and a verbal contract (although harder to enforce) is still valid. They offered the OP a position, he accepted, simple. Now regarding not a leg to stand on, well the job was advertised, yet when he was called the following week to say that he was no longer offered a position because the company didn't feel it required a new employee. Been discussed numerous times on WP, a company cannot advertise a non-existent job.

Sydney Garrie writes...

No way.

An off the rack suit is an off the rack suit: it costs what it costs regardless of how well it fits the person buying it.

The cheaper suits are cheaper for a reason. Sure, there may be exceptions, but a suit in the $500-1000 bracket is generally better quality in terms the fabric, stitching and design.

The bottom-line is don't wear a cheap suit to an interview if you can afford something better. You don't want to give them another reason to put you in the "do not hire" bin

Blaman writes...

My opinion is that an entry level position is not the place to be spending your life savings on a suit + shoes just in a lame attempt at impressing people who have more self worth than bill gates has money. Its dumb.

The trouble is that the job market is currently so tight, and there's so much competition, that things like your general appearance can make the difference between getting hired or not. You don't have to spend your life's savings, but you will get a lot of wear out of a good quality suit, and it may even help you get a job.

TripleGem writes...

Would someone be able to easily tell that it is from Lowes?--lol :)

I doubt it would be a problem :D

Lowes are too thin...went for an interview and the interviewer could see my nipples.

numonex writes...

IMO $38 suits at Rivers look just as good as those expensive suits.

LMFAO- comment of the thread.

LMFAO @ "Ball Scum" :D

numonex Rivers $38 suits as good as the expensive ones is a cracker and deserving of a Gold medal.....but imho..I'm with Sima Yi 893 and giving it to the OP....'Ball scum' takes the Gold.
Not just a cracker...it's a 'Penny Bunger' lol :-D

lachyzee writes...

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that.

About all you can do at this point is name and shame.

So, name and shame.

It relevant to all of us as we want to be informed so we can avoid having it happen to us.

That is downright unacceptable!

However it's probably better you find out now etc.... use it as a learning experience etc.... (a thousand other things you don't want to hear that make you feel better!).

A better position will come along in the long term. $2k is a lot to spend, however now you are ready :)

I feel really sorry for you and wonder why employers think people have no loyalty anymore. Is it anywonder when they treat people like this!

Wow this thread really took off to some unexpected places. Thanks for all the sympathy & clothing advice (though I think i'll stick to dry cleaning suits for now, rather than the washing machine...).

To address a couple of the replies:

-I dealt with the principal in the interview, and in one phone call following, not just the office manager (who happens to be his sister I think, or wife). Thus I believed what he was saying.
-I never intended to pursue, or thought I might have some sort of action against the firm. I'm well aware, as a law student, that a verbal agreement might constitute a binding contract but, really, we're not playing for sheepstations here. Would not be worth the time/effort.
-Sorry but I am not going to name the firm in this thread. If you a really desperate to know, and can give me a good reason, send a whim.
-Sure, spending an extra $500 on your suit may only give you a slight advantage over an identical candidate in cheaper clothing, and certainly won't put you above someone with a better CV/interview, but in this job market even a 1% advantage would be worth it I feel: you'll make up the cost in no time once you're pulling in a salary, while the other guy is sitting on the couch playing MarioKart 64 in a crumpled, cheap suit. Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Anyway on to developments in the last few days:

Thankfully, I have now come by a job at the second firm that I originally turned down the interview for. It has better pay, better future prospects in terms of doing articles there (which are damn tough to come by at the moment as well, so great to possibly have that option), and is very well regarded by the major players in the area of law the specialise in. Really, I probably should never have turned down the interview in the first place – I guess I had a bit more loyalty to my supposed employer than they had to me!

The only follow up action I took was to send this email to the office of the first firm a couple of days ago. I also consulted the careers office at my university who agreed that this was the best course of action, and said they would be very hesitant to list jobs from that firm again:

-----------

Dear xxxxxx,

I am sorry to write to you in this circumstance however I felt that
I had to express my dissatisfaction with what occurred across the last
couple of days.

I accepted your verbal offer of a position on Friday afternoon, and,
being excited to start on Tuesday, took steps over the weekend to
prepare myself. I changed my subject enrollment and timetable at
University so that I could work Monday-Wednesday, bought new shirts,
new shoes and a new suit and other things I felt I would need, and,
perhaps most importantly, turned down a possible job offer from
another firm on Saturday.

To be honest, the expenditure is not really important to me – it is
more that I feel that it was inappropriate, on your part, to make me
an offer and then rescind it, with very little explanation, less than
20 hours before I was due to start. Particularly as I may now
miss out on another position because of this.

While I understand that circumstances and workloads can change
day-to-day, I am nevertheless somewhat disappointed.

It is a real shame, as I had looked forward to working with you and
xxxxx this year.

Good luck with the firm.

Sincerely,

xxxxxxx

-------------

Until now I still have not received even a "we're sorry, good luck" reply. I think that alone says everything I needed to know about that place, if any doubt remained.

So from my point of view everything turned out OK.

I think it was the suit that did the trick ;)

lachyzee writes...

I think it was the suit that did the trick ;)

^ Nice one....funny how things often turn out for the better after an initial disappointment...their loss...and the new gear a worthwhile investment..good luck. Cheers :-D

Your a law student and the word "contract" didn't come into mind?

lachyzee writes...

The only follow up action I took was to send this email to the office of the first firm a couple of days ago.

Good on you mate! It's theraputic to vent in a civilised manner, even though nothing may come of it. They prolly won't reply because they are lazy/miserable twats and/or they want to minimise the risk of legal action.

Congrats for the new job...sounds like it was the better option.

lachyzee writes...

Until now I still have not received even a "we're sorry, good luck" reply. I think that alone says everything I needed to know about that place, if any doubt remained.

Hear here!

I think it was the suit that did the trick ;)

Most definately!
Now try going to work and
sitting on the couch playing MarioKart 64... :)

Glad it worked out for the OP. Being a law student doesnt have shite to do with it, if youre offered a job you dont expect that to happen, its just unprofessional and would have caused angst for whomever they had done this too.

As for the suits, sounds reasonable. Unless youre buying bold pinstripes or something suits last a while, may as well invest in something descent. All I will say to others reading this thread is get it tailored to fit. Yes even those $500 basic wool ones off the rack can be fixed up by a tailor to fit you ALOT better for not much more.

hell of an email you sent mate, well done.

lachyzee writes...

I find it extremely unprofessional and unethical of a firm to act like that

lol!! ummmm, errrrrr, "Law Firm", errr "Sharks", what more you expect??????

Imagine the headline –
'Law student takes on law firm and wins'
Wonder whether this would enhance or detract from their job prospects at other law firms?
(not that I'm suggesting it in this case)

-

Blaman writes...

All up i'd say I spent between $1500-2000
on 2 suits, a pair of shoes and a bag? sounds like you got ripped buddy :)

I'd say that's a very carefully worked out price to spend on that kind of thing.

$300 – decent manbag/soft briefcase (a bally one could set you back $1500)
$150 – shoes
$600 per suit – off the rack, well fitting suit from a decent 'name'.

in the city, you notice these things – my company once got a job because I care enough about the details to have Mont Blanc cufflinks.*

* i know this may make me a tw@

bythe way OP, congrats on getting the job at the second firm, and caring enough about your job to have the correct attire and approach. your email I think was slightly too chummy – personally I would've carried a bit more....not threat, but terseness...in it if I were you – it reads more like an upset student than a screwed over professional (which from your other posts, I think you are).

cheers,

John

I had this happen to me once, except that I was offered a job and was then called back a few days later to be told that no one had offered me the job, I must have heard the person wrong and even if the person had done so, they weren't authorized to offer me a job, but I could come in for a "second" interview if I liked. What a load of cr@p, I know what I heard! Anyway I accepted the second interview and also received another job offer elsewhere before the interview which I accepted.

I still went to the interview, acted like a complete prat, criticized the person who had originally offered me the job, criticized the management who refused to accept my claim of employment offered to me and otherwise let loose about my thoughts of their organization. It was a hell of a lot of fun! I have since worked my way up to senior level in my field, something I would never have been able to do in that place of employment.

Learn from your experience and be patient, good things will come your way soon.

Froggeh writes...

my company once got a job because I care enough about the details to have Mont Blanc cufflinks.*

Glad to hear how the detail can make a difference.

your email I think was slightly too chummy

it reads more like an upset student than a screwed over professional

Agree with these, although it shows that you are a decent bloke.

Blaman writes...

so many people thinking that their fancy expensive clothes make up for their lack of skill. oh well.

Nothing wrong with wearing good quality gear.

I get that your still at uni... but even uni students should know what a washing machine is. ask your mum for goodness sake.

This made me laugh pretty hard. Luckily the OP isnt going to listen to any advice you recommend. Putting a suit in the washing machine? Maybe you do with your best and less clothing.

Froggeh writes...

I'd say that's a very carefully worked out price to spend on that kind of thing.

no shirts?

a 'manbag'?... *giggle* i guess the only sort of men you would impress with a $600+ suit are those who would notice a manbag too.. of well. Each to their own.

Blaman writes...

i guess the only sort of men you would impress with a $600+ suit are those who would notice a manbag too.. of well. Each to their own.

Impress Men???
Aren't you forgetting someone?......women lol....correct me if I'm wrong, but last I heard women seem to like a man dressed in a smart suit. Being well groomed is kind of.....attractive.
Lots of well dressed women around a law firm...and who knows, the manager may very well be a fashion conscious....woman?

Edit: Tip – get yourself some Armani 'Code' $130 75ml..drool ;-P
I'd say at a guess, Brut 33 would be a bit of a stretch for comrade Blaman :-)

You got screwed by lawyers. Join the club!

Moon writes...

last I heard women seem to like a man dressed in a smart suit

for sure... but when they see the 'manbag', they instantly know that women arnt his type.. <wink wink> <nudge nudge>. Not that theres anything wrong with that...

Blaman writes...

but when they see the 'manbag'

I had an ex-girlfriend show up (invited) at my birthday do once..and guess what she got me as a present...yep..leather manbag.
I don't walk down the street with it as I prefer to pack my pockets to keep my hands free when possible. I use it for bathroom gear when going away.
Professionals needing to always be presentable at their work really need something other than their suit pockets to carry gear around. it is not a good look to be bulking out your suit and it stretches and wears the fabric reducing it's life.
Not my style, but in a job where accessories needed to be on hand, I would carry one.

lachyzee writes...

The only follow up action I took was to send this email to the office of the first firm a couple of days ago.

Frankly your approach is un-professional, and you should know that law firms dont use email correspondence in the manner that you have. A letter (snailmail) on your personal letterhead would have been the only way to express your dissapointment at the alleged mis-handling by this law firm with repsect to the job offer you received. If your teacher/s approved of this style of correspondence (email) they need a refresher course in letter writing.

Now,

Why were you knocked back ? I feel that between Friday and 1600 hours Monday they have done a reference check. They were not happy with what they heard so they changed their minds.

Or

Someone better showed up after you and they simply changed their minds.

Did you by any chance talk to anyone about this position between Friday and Monday? The golden rule is NEVER let your left hand know what your righthand is doing. Especially when it comes to job offers.. Rule of thumb, dont tell your mates.

There appears to be a fixation on suits, why is that ? Whats the big deal about clothing ?

.

NoCashatAll writes...

?

Your post is right on the money.
ref chk or loose lips playd a role in this case.

ps: teacher? laughable to approve such a childish worded email.

ZAK248313 writes...

$1500 sounds like a bargain for a couple of decent suits, shoes and bag.

I think the issue isn't how much good suits cost (and they cost), but whether a student/junior should be buying good suits in the first place.

A pair of basic off the shelf suits from any number of places can be had for around the $250 mark each, and that's all any reasonable company would expect of a person in such a situation.

Oh... and yes I'm the company person that does our hiring for entry level positions.

It's a shame your timetable was mangled, but you can still use the stuff you bought for any job you might go for.

NoCashatAll writes...

Frankly your approach is un-professional, and you should know that law firms dont use email correspondence in the manner that you have. A letter (snailmail) on your personal letterhead would have been the only way to express your dissapointment at the alleged mis-handling by this law firm with repsect to the job offer you received. If your teacher/s approved of this style of correspondence (email) they need a refresher course in letter writing.

Unprofessional?

He is a student...

Law firms dont use email? Really? Christ, they need to get with the times!

Letterhead? Yes because everybody has their own whizbang fancy letter head to send complaint letters out on!

Anyway, I really doubt they checked references and heard something bad – that would be unusual as no one supplies a reference that will say something bad.

Doesnt matter what their reason was does it? It is unprofessional.

Do you really think the OP would have been here if they gave a legitimate reason (such as a more suitable candidate came along?) other than the crap they fed him?

Blaman writes...

but even uni students should know what a washing machine is.

Putting your suit in a washing machine........lol

NoCashatAll writes...

Frankly your approach is un-professional

What firm doesn't do a reference check before asking someone to give their employment details? Personal letterhead? It's a student intern position, hardly calls for anything other than an email imo. Frankly though I probably wouldn't have bothered telling them anything. People talk, cliques exist and you never know what you've said or done (in truth or not) that comes back to you.

OP, at least you found a position in the end. Just remember don't do anything until the contract is signed. Another thing I've seen happen is resiging from one job before signing a contract for another (just going off verbal "you've got the job"). Mistake imo, but you've come out alright and a little bit wiser, so best of luck in your new job.

Maybe the OP has high taste in his clothes and has a good fashion sense. Not everybody likes wearing $100 roger david suits.

liteon writes...

Unprofessional?

He is a student...

Very unprofessional, even a bigger reason to show more finesse when dealing with finite issues, especially when you decide to ask for a public opinion.

Law firms dont use email? Really? Christ, they need to get with the times!

No they dont, you obviously have never needed their services. The Op was rightly annoyed at the way his employment offer was handled by the slack reason for withdrawl. But they (firm) had their reasons.

Letterhead? Yes because everybody has their own whizbang fancy letter head to send complaint letters out on!

Hmmmm, thats a troll. I am 100% sure that the OP has a Word processor to design his own personal letter head. His name, position in life and contact details is all thats needed. Is that so hard to do ? Julia Gillard obviously has a very good point about teaching the basics before we make rocket scientists out of all you guys.

Anyway, I really doubt they checked references and heard something bad – that would be unusual as no one supplies a reference that will say something bad.

Do you know what a reference is ? How do you know that the Office manager of this law firm did not have a daughter at the same uni as the job applicant ? The answer to that is – you dont know. Anyone that knows you can talk ABOUT YOU! Wake up.

Do you really think the OP would have been here if they gave a legitimate reason (such as a more suitable candidate came along?) other than the crap they fed him?

Thats not for me to answer, I dont care. He invited public comment and the public replied. You should be directing your questions towards him. I have a job, and a good one at that.

Doesnt matter what their reason was does it? It is unprofessional.

The entire scenario is lack lustre. I was surprised that his financial details were requested before he had even set foot in the office. Maybe he told the tailor that he had been offered a partnership in a legal firm ! Only he knows the truth, we can only speculate.

Have a Nice day :)

I tend to agree with Cashy, except for the 'Troll' bit.
Although the OP is deserving of a little sympathy, which has been forthcoming in other posts, if he is going to learn and improve his future prospects in a Law career, I believe that it would be a wise move to take on board what NoCashatAll has mentioned in his posts.
It may have come across a little harsh, but the content is of value and certainly worth remembering for the journey ahead imho :-P

Am I the only person who assumed NoCashAtAll was joking? Surprised to see all the people jumping on his comments as it still seems that way upon a second read...I agree though, a bit concerning if he meant it seriously. Maybe I have an automatic filter to turn ridiculous things people say into things I assume are jokes.

ResmeN writes...

Maybe the OP has high taste in his clothes and has a good fashion sense. Not everybody likes wearing $100 roger david suits.

Maybe they do. I don't wear cheap suits myself, a good suit is a wonderful thing :)

The difference is I'm not an almost broke student applying for an entry level position.

musk-stick writes...

Am I the only person who assumed NoCashAtAll was joking?

I wouldn't put my house on it.
I think Cashy is a straight shooter that tells it how he sees it without the padding?
As like the rest of us, the OP and anyone else filters people's opinions and advice and makes of it what they will.
NoCash was just presenting his point of view in an attempt to point out some flaws in the OPs strategy.
I just happen to believe it was a worthwhile contribution and at least food for thought.

NoCashatAll writes...

Frankly your approach is un-professional, and you should know that law firms dont use email correspondence in the manner that you have.

NoCashatAll writes...

No they dont, you obviously have never needed their services.

what a load of absolute crap.

I work in a court and 95% of firms use email, fax or in person to deliver correspondence as these methods are best for getting delivery receipt

some may followup with a letter if the matter is not urgent.

I'm in a role where i interact with the firms all the time and most of them are more than happy to correspond by email. I also regularly get CC'd into emails between firms.

COOL STORY BRO writes...

I'm in a role where i interact with the firms all the time and most of them are more than happy to correspond by email. I also regularly get CC'd into emails between firms.

+1

On the snail mail topic – Many workplaces only accept things in writing as generally they get a signature out of it instead of a few words that may have come from anyone (how many people could hop on your comp if you forgot to lock it and type a resignation? Some people hold grudges!!!) and see e-mails as unprofessional so no idea what the big idea is about not wanting e-mails (it's like just saying "I quit" then say the company sued you for some reason you have no proof you ever quit except your word against their written contract... unless you tape recorded and are crazy prepared).

On-topic (sorry for the rant), maybe someone at the work wanted less hours so they figured hire a new part-timer/full-timer but then said person wanted the hours back and/or they put more hours on current people/didn't want to train you.

Anything could be the cause but no reason to assume it went to a friend/family of the employer otherwise it makes an ass out of you and me :P but offering a job then withdrawing it within the course of a weekend isn't somewhere you want to work.

Also, $250 suits, not $500-700!

COOL STORY BRO writes...

I work in a court and 95% of firms use email, fax or in person to deliver correspondence as these methods are best for getting delivery receipt

Between firms this method is acceptable, so is dx and thats about it, unless the client is paying for additional services. The OPs letter should have been posted or hand delivered if he did not have an issue eyeballing these trollops again.

what a load of absolute crap.

Yes your reply definately passed the boundary of etiquette. I feel sorry for anyone that would have to deal with you and that attitude. There obviously seems to be a high horse that you legal people carry on your back like a brass monkey.

COOL STORY BRO writes...

I'm in a role where i interact with the firms all the time and most of them are more than happy to correspond by email. I also regularly get CC'd into emails between firms.

Well "bully for you" No relevance whatsoever. You are in the business, the OP was not. Relax and carefully read his email reply to a law firm. You guys crack me up.

elnoobocompo writes...

Many workplaces only accept things in writing as generally they get a signature out of it instead of a few words that may have come from anyone (how many people could hop on your comp if you forgot to lock it and type a resignation? Some people hold grudges!!!) and see e-mails as unprofessional so no idea what the big idea is about not wanting e-mails

I resigned from my last job via email, they asked me to ; ) After I told them verbally of course.

This was a Fortune 500 company btw, not mom and pops bakehouse.

NoCashatAll writes...

The OPs letter should have been posted or hand delivered if he did not have an issue eyeballing these trollops again.

Fact of the matter is I don't think the firm cares too much if he wrote it on a scroll and carrier pigeoned it over. Email accounts for so much company correspondance (both internal and external) it doesn't really make much difference. It was a bit of a parting shot, who gives a shit how it arrived.

Moon writes...

I tend to agree with Cashy, except for the 'Troll' bit
Ok I accept that observation and I have appeased the masses.

Although the OP is deserving of a little sympathy, which has been forthcoming in other posts, if he is going to learn and improve his future prospects in a Law career

Ok, lets all gey wishy washy, piss in each others pockets and cry in our beer. Being a corporate player for many years, I can assure you that if he gets cut up at this little incident, he will get his teeth dismantled when he enters the "real" ugly world out there.

My advice to him 70% politics 30 % productivity. Thats the formula.

["It may have come across a little harsh, but the content is of value and certainly worth remembering for the journey ahead imho :-PI tend to agree with Cashy, except for the 'Troll' bit.]

Its not personal at all, people take comment personally instead of objectively in this place. My opinion of the OP is neither negative neutral or positive. I trust he will have a fruitfull experience in his new found position. But, he has a big learning curve ahead of him and he will have to quickly learn discretion in his chosen career. You will agree with me "Moon" he doesnt have any. If he did we would not be replying to this thread.

SnakeHed writes...

Fact of the matter is I don't think the firm cares too much

The fact of the matter is that the OP cared enough to start a thread about this occurence. This being the case he should have followed procedure. The correct way would have been a formal letter. That would have shown this ma and pa firm that they were dealing with a true professional that crosses his "t" and dots his "i".

Email accounts for so much company correspondance

What are you talking about? This dude has been flip-flopped, his correspondence has nothing to do with day to day operating issues. He has expressed his concern at what happened and rightfully deserves some respect. If he sits back and has a good long hard think about what happened he will work out himself why the offer was withdrawn. He can refer back to his notes or recording of the interview. (for personal use).

He did take notes, didnt he ?

SnakeHed writes...

It was a bit of a parting shot, who gives a shit how it arrived.

That parting shot could haunt him at a later stage of his career, did you ever think of that.

This was a Fortune 500 company btw, not mom and pops bakehouse.

So what if it was a F500, should I be impressed?

NoCashatAll writes...

This being the case he should have followed procedure. The correct way would have been a formal letter.

Correct way according to whom? In a firm who arguably acted in an unprofessional manner, does it really matter? Not much in my opinion.

What are you talking about? This dude has been flip-flopped, his correspondence has nothing to do with day to day operating issues.

Are you having trouble with your comprehension? I was stating a point that far more important communication that a parting shot by a vac student is done via email, therefore I don't think it's crossing some ettiquete boundary to write an email.

NoCashatAll writes...

That parting shot could haunt him at a later stage of his career, did you ever think of that.

Yes I mentioned that in an earlier post......

Regardless of the manner in which it was sent, it will most likely be promptly ignored and forgotten. Sending a letter isn't going to make 2 shits worth of difference, therefore I'm not sure why you keep harping on about it like he's crossed some massive line.

So what if it was a F500, should I be impressed?
Well it wasn't directed at you, I was quoting someone else on a different point. If it impresses you well done, if not I better take a bex now because I'll almost certainly have trouble sleeping tonight.

He did take notes, didnt he ?
In an interview? Jesus I can see why an email has you upset. Is that some token way of showing interest?

We got ol' Cashy firing up on all 8 cylinders now – love your work :-D
I'm no corporate guru, or communications expert, but I was under the impression that in order to at least be acknowledged to the point of having some sort of chance of your letter being passed on to management, you had to send in a formal letter of complaint and not simply whipping up and sending an email.
A well written formal letter is more professional and deserves to be taken more seriously than an email.

If I was the OP and knew my letter writing skills were not up to scratch, I'd be getting a skilled friend to read it and suggest changes just so that I didn't end up making a dill of myself in an Industry I was starting out in.

SnakeHed writes...

In an interview?

Absolutely, memorise the conversation and dot points asap once out the door. The art form of note taking has diminished with those stupid "I" things that seem to be everywhere. My trusty abacus and diary (yes a paper book) is fail safe and so are my methods.

SnakeHed writes...

Regardless of the manner in which it was sent, it will most likely be promptly ignored and forgotten.

But. if the OP was a "thinker" instead of a "reactor" he would have at least reversed any doubts that this prospective employer may have had with a tactfull reply.

I would have expressed disappointment in my letter if it were me, but the aim would have been to plant the idea in their head that they had made an unfortunate error that serves as a loss to both parties.
Showing disappointment and being polite about it shows them that you are not a pushover and strong enough to take a setback and then move on in a positive manner.
I would have briefly mentioned my attributes and how I could be an asset to their firm if they should reconsider you for a position in the future.
Leaving the door open for future possibilities is a much smarter strategy than burning your bridges.

Moon writes...

If I was the OP and knew my letter writing skills were not up to scratch, I'd be getting a skilled friend to read it and suggest changes just so that I didn't end up making a dill of myself in an Industry I was starting out in.

Exactly, I cant understand why there is so much negativity towards writing a "letter". I dont mind an email when dealing with day to day procedures but when important issues arise and a level of formality is required I detest email with a passion.

This is the very reason why there are so many corporate leaks. Sending un-encrypted electronic mail.

A well worded letter will always be respected and will command a reply. If the reply is not forthcoming the OP has covered all his bases. If this event ever came up in an interview he would simply furnish his "professional" letter that was either hand delivered or sent registered post to the ma and pa law firm and simply point out that he never received closure over this issue.

If I was the prospective employer I would be impressed by this response and more than likely give him a job. Is that not the goal ?

NoCashatAll writes...

If I was the prospective employer I would be impressed by this response and more than likely give him a job. Is that not the goal ?

In this case I don't think he wants anything more to do with that company after their unprofessional behaviour. So if an email is less likely to get him a job, he's fine with that.

LOL and I thought you were joking...

NoCashatAll writes...

If I was the prospective employer I would be impressed by this response and more than likely give him a job. Is that not the goal ?

No, he's already secured a job elsewhere. The E-mail is to inform the other company that messed him around of what a Mickey Mouse operation they're running. The medium is hence perfectly sufficient.

Shugyosha writes...

No, he's already secured a job elsewhere.

Yes we know that, thank you.

The E-mail is to inform the other company that messed him around of what a Mickey Mouse operation they're running.

Oh really ! I recall that the Op was looking for employment.

The medium is hence perfectly sufficient.

For you and the OP it is.

musk-stick writes...

In this case I don't think he wants anything more to do with that company

Well, they did flick him with a lame excuse.

So if an email is less likely to get him a job, he's fine with that.

Are you his mouthpiece, and with that said the credibility of the thread is now questionable.

LOL and I thought you were joking...

I dont joke when it comes to money which is the result of employment which is what the OP was seeking. I suppose if you feel that bare minimum is acceptable thats fine, for you. Not for me.

NoCashatAll writes...

Are you his mouthpiece, and with that said the credibility of the thread is now questionable.

OK, I don't know for sure, but in past posts he made it pretty clear he was no longer interested in that company, the email was not intended to get him a job, and he was working elsewhere.

NoCashatAll writes...

I suppose if you feel that bare minimum is acceptable thats fine.

Now you're being my mouthpiece and saying the wrong thing...I just thought your refusal to acknowledge email as a legitimate form of communication was funny.

musk-stick writes...

I just thought your refusal to acknowledge email as a legitimate form of communication was funny.

I did not say that. In this instance it was not correct. If I employ a professional and pay top dollar I expect protocol, formality and confidentiality. Email is not secure, If your "modus operandi" revolves around email as a legitimate method of delivering important documents I simply would not employ you. Nothing personal.

NoCashatAll writes...

Email is not secure, If your "modus operandi" revolves around email as a legitimate method of delivering important documents I simply would not employ you. Nothing personal.

That's just you. If you look at job applications, you'll see most of them have an email address provided to send your information, and no postal address given. Occasionally you'll see a postal address, or both, but that's the minority. I've got my last several jobs by emailing my employment info.

Get with the times...

NoCashatAll writes...

For you and the OP it is.

Oh no, not for me. An E-mail is far too new fangled and crude for a gentleman. I'd reach for my quill, pen an eloquent missive, seal it with my family crest in wax and have my manservent deliver it posthaste!

musk-stick writes...

Get with the times...

It cuts both ways but that remark merely depicts the inflexibilty of prospective employees that wonder why they cant get a job.. Would you tell a prospective employer to "get with the times" if they didnt play with an ipod or sms all day. That remark is very naive.

If you look at job applications, you'll see most of them have an email address provided to send your information, and no postal address given.

I dont need to look at job applications so Ill take your word for it.

NoCashatAll writes...

It cuts both ways but that remark merely depicts the inflexibilty of prospective employees that wonder why they cant get a job..

Or an employee who got her last 3+ jobs solely via email, after being told not to post in applications.

musk-stick writes...

Or an employee who got her last 3+ jobs solely via email, after being told not to post in applications.

Ok, and the instruction was not to post the application, that is totally understood and acceptable.

Here's a tip for young players. If you need new clothing for a job and it's the same type of attire you'd wear at the interview – then it's best to purchase it before you start interviewing. Prior preparation / first impressions and all that.

Of course that's if you are serious about job hunting and don't plan on just attending one or two interviews in a ball scum suit.

I am actually impressed that you spent $2000 on two suits, I'm sure there are other places that sell them cheaper? Did you try and get them returned if they met the refund standards? Or exchanged if you won't use them.

Bad luck on the let go I guess :(

I'd send them an Email thanking them for wasting my time, wasting another job offer and wasting my money sooner than I'd have liked. Explain tho them what you told us, if anything it'll make them feel bad that they did that to you, or they'd feel like tools.

While on the topic of suits, you could get them made up overseas....$250 for a tailored suit, even if it needs some alterations it would still cost less than $300.

http://www.studiosuits.com/index.php?main_page=products_all

Adelaide Data
I'd imagine an email containing ^ probably wouldn't make it past the secretary whom opens the emails.
If your lucky it might attract a glance, but I doubt an email like this would achieve anything (from their perspective) other than simply confirming that they had made the right decision.

If the OP receives an apologetic reply, then my take on the situation may require a review?

Displaying 'sour grapes', regardless of the inconvenience to the 'rejected' is not advisable imho.
Guys in particular need to handle rejection in their early lives in particular (think women).
Dealing with the disappointment internally with a review of where you may have gone wrong and where improvement can be made next time is a better strategy imo.

Edit: V I certainly got a laugh from it :-)

Shugyosha writes...

I'd reach for my quill, pen an eloquent missive, seal it with my family crest in wax and have my manservent deliver it posthaste!

best post of this thread.

NoCashatAll writes...

There obviously seems to be a high horse that you legal people carry on your back like a brass monkey.

perhaps you should get off your high horse know it all attitude considering you don't know what you are talking about, especially as you don't work in the legal field.

marty2 writes...

http://www.studiosuits.com/index.php?main_page=products_all

has anyone ever used that place? I can never find suits that suit my lack of neck and short arms.

Reveler writes...

has anyone ever used that place? I can never find suits that suit my lack of neck and short arms.

One of my mates got some made up for his groomsmen at his wedding. They looked pretty good.

COOL STORY BRO writes...

considering you don't know what you are talking about

and you do, doubt that you work any field!

Blaman writes...

hope they are self cleaning shoes. or at least make your bed while your in the shower... gawd.

You can not buy decent shoes in Australia. That is a fact.

$300 shoes in Australia are worth crap, made of crap and look crap.

So many people on these forums with no class (and no idea), stick to your computers people and don't make silly comments!

Regarding the OP, now you've got some decent working clothes for when you do have a job – its not a waste.

moody writes...

So many people on these forums with no class

if you regard class by the cost of someones shoes, i pitty you.

Blaman writes...

if you regard class by the cost of someones shoes, i pitty you.

How someone dresses and presents themselves is a part of someones "class". Sounds like many people here don't care how they look or present themselves.

Everyone who has a liveable wage, and can afford a $2-3k computer for gaming, can afford a $500-1000 suit.

LOL it's always funny reading the first page of a thread and then jumping to the last and noticing the only topic of conversation is some random discussion about suit prices and nothing about the OP's situation :P.

I went for a job interview once and by the time I got home from it there was a message on my answering machine telling me I was wouldn't fit in to the company demographic. WTF is that?? Did I have a booger on my face during the interview or something?

moody writes...

You can not buy decent shoes in Australia. That is a fact.

You clearly can't see past your own misplaced ego. Fact.

Everyone who has a liveable wage, and can afford a $2-3k computer for gaming, can afford a $500-1000 suit.

That's about as moronic as saying anyone who can afford $2-3K for a computer can afford $50 each day for lunch, and anyone who brings their own lunch or eats anywhere with coffees under $10 has no class. People like you are why so much of the 'corporate' world is just one giant wankfest.

FerretallicA writes...

People like you are why so much of the 'corporate' world is just one giant wankfest.

+2 internets for you. and a :D

moody writes...

How someone dresses and presents themselves is a part of someones "class".

Up to a certain point. If you dress in rags, perhaps. Anything above that is not representative of wealth, it is just personal choice. Anyone who spends $1000 on a few clothes is visibly just an idiot, unless it is absolutely required for a job. They either look like a moron who can't manage their money, or a wanker trying to perpetuate ridiculous corporate culture just to feel good about themselves.

It's more about your manner, and whether you are clean and in shape than the shoes you wear. If you think that the clothes people wear determines their value, then you need to grow up.

Being fat used to be a sign of wealth and health. Now it is a sign of emotional problems and a lack of self discipline and motivation.

If you are going to cry over one bad experience then you are in for a massive shock if you make it through the law degree. At the end of the day its all about whats right for the business, I have had interviews go well and then been rejected.

A law degree is simply that, a piece of paper. You must keep your head up high and stay positive, KEEP APPLYING AND KEEP TRYING it will come in time.

tikalal writes...

Anyone who spends $1000 on a few clothes is visibly just an idiot

I have three suits, the cheapest of which was around ~$1400. You don't need to spend that much, although I choose to, but there is a lot of difference in both quality and style between a cheap suit and an expensive, tailored suit (which mine are).

It amuses me that IT nerds who wouldn't hesitate to recommend a Cisco switch over a Belkin switch and could easily explain why the significantly higher cost is justified, can't understand that the same logic can apply to clothes. I guess as long as it keeps you from freezing to death, keeps your privates covered, and complies with the companies guidelines, then that's all the boxes ticked on the clothing front. :D

Shugyosha writes...

It amuses me that IT nerds who wouldn't hesitate to recommend a Cisco switch over a Belkin switch and could easily explain why the significantly higher cost is justified, can't understand that the same logic can apply to clothes.

If it's a comfort/practical/quality thing then it's different to maximising peen :)

As if anyone is surprised that nerds don't spend money on clothes and buy their suits from Lowes :/

You can always pick an IT professional by his, (it's no accident that I use the word 'his'), clothes.

justin.au writes...

You can always pick an IT professional by his, (it's no accident that I use the word 'his'), clothes.

I'm an IT professional myself and I hate the stereotype and like to think I personally don't really conform to it; but I've worked with enough people and read enough threads like this to know there's no smoke without fire. :)

illicit writes...

About all you can do at this point is name and shame.

No actually, he can't. Law student should know libel and slander rules.

Company can mount a defense, job was advertised then taken. Potential candidate then bad mouthed the company. GL finding a job later.

liteon writes...

Law firms dont use email? Really? Christ, they need to get with the times!

Electronic mail still isn't regarded all that highly. Law is still letter based. And letters vs emails still ends up with letters on top. Email = 30sec. Letter = careful thought and sincere. Then with the privacy issues mentioned repeatedly so far.

NoCashatAll writes...

Anyone that knows you can talk ABOUT YOU! Wake up.

And thanks to Facebook, everyone with a Google connection can talk about you. :D

COOL STORY BRO writes...

I work in a court and 95% of firms use email, fax or in person to deliver correspondence as these methods are best for getting delivery receipt

I'm not in Law, yet if plans work, I'm a techy. So when I tell you emails don't give reliable reciepts, it's not because you know what you're talking about and I'm the naive person. Quite the opposite in fact.

Fax or in person would be your best bet for a reciept, and they're paper based, so letter. Right? A.. Gah, mind blank. That postage option where they have to sign off on it, registered post or some such. That's another option, but again, that's paper based so a letter.

NoCashatAll writes...

My advice to him 70% politics 30 % productivity. Thats the formula.

Isn't that the formula for everything? It's not what you do, it's how you do it and who you show.

Shugyosha writes...

It amuses me that IT nerds who wouldn't hesitate to recommend a Cisco switch over a Belkin switch and could easily explain why the significantly higher cost is justified, can't understand that the same logic can apply to clothes.

Two different things. On the one hand, we're talking about needed components, on the other, we're talking about trying to impress ... "Slow people", who can't tell the difference between a neat, cheap suit and an expensive one.

Work smart, not hard. =P If you want to impress people, do it properly. Cheap suits for the masses, expensive suits if you're with someone who knows the difference. And see previous posts, it's been said multiple times that the OP is a student, and thus not expected to be wearing high end clothing. It could even look bad if he did. He's a beginner, acting otherwise is faking it and lame depending on the person. To some it could be a sign of intelligence and style, along with discernment and whatever other words you wish to throw in. Easier to go with the cheap option though, more reliable.

Having said that, the more expensive a suit is, seems to be more comfortable up to a certain point. Haven't tried the highly expensive (for a student) suits yet (upwards of $1K), but in my experience the cheap suits feel like it. "Plasticy" almost. As the suits go up in price, the quality gets better. So they're more comforable, no threads sticking out, buttons staying on and in a straight line, etc. They also look better, seams in particular seem to stand out less on a good suit, making it look less patchwork.

Moon writes...

Guys in particular need to handle rejection in their early lives in particular (think women).

That's dealt with by vodka/whiskey and poker, emails never work. =P

Off topic, Whirlpool needs a new slogan. "Know your fashion" or some such, given the amount of threads I've seen turn into arguing over suits and the like. =P
Someone start a suit thread, list suits instead of routers. Winner gets a hypothetical cookie.

lachyzee writes...

Monday (yesterday) I get a call at 4pm – it's the office manager again – "Oh sorry, we have had a look at our workload and...ummmm... we don't have a position for you anymore".

Gosh there are some stupid lawyers out there. I've seen them do this not just to employees but to clients.

The answer is obvious: Tell them to pay you compensation (nominated by you) or you will sue them for breach of contract. :-)

Umeki writes...

Gosh there are some stupid lawyers out there

Ahhhh....really....?

sue them for breach of contract

Gosh there are some stupid lay-people out there.

Umeki writes...

The answer is obvious: Tell them to pay you compensation (nominated by you) or you will sue them for breach of contract. :-)

LOL Damn, you're funny!

justin.au writes...

You can always pick an IT professional by his, (it's no accident that I use the word 'his'), clothes.

To the point where some professionals who do own very nice clothes sometimes deliberately 'dress down' in order to be taken seriously as an IT pro.

There are limits, though – one government place I worked in had a sysadmin who walked around in grey towelling tracky daks and thongs every day. People didn't know if he was part of IT or had wandered in from the alleyway.

FerretallicA writes...

That's about as moronic as saying anyone who can afford $2-3K for a computer can afford $50 each day for lunch, and anyone who brings their own lunch or eats anywhere with coffees under $10 has no class.

God I love these stupid ass analogies. Well done.

tikalal writes...

Up to a certain point. If you dress in rags, perhaps. Anything above that is not representative of wealth, it is just personal choice. Anyone who spends $1000 on a few clothes is visibly just an idiot, unless it is absolutely required for a job. They either look like a moron who can't manage their money, or a wanker trying to perpetuate ridiculous corporate culture just to feel good about themselves.

It's more about your manner, and whether you are clean and in shape than the shoes you wear. If you think that the clothes people wear determines their value, then you need to grow up.

Priorities. If you can spend several thousand on a computer. You can spend $500-1000 on a good suit that will last you a life time. I've seen some pretty silly shit on these boards, many comments in this thread are a hoot. I guess if you're a plumper working in knee high shit all day then you might not need a decent suit for interviews/special occasions at work etc.

But if you're working at a global firm with 10,000+ employees and you need to play the game to rise in the ranks, its conform or fail. Same goes for interviews and so on. Wow.

Geminii writes...

There are limits, though – one government place I worked in had a sysadmin who walked around in grey towelling tracky daks and thongs every day. People didn't know if he was part of IT or had wandered in from the alleyway.

Hence why HE didn't get asked Stupid IT questions. They (The users) didn't think he was in IT.
Hell who hasn't gone to work in Jeans and T-Shirt doing IT support.
I let the Managers wear the suits, get asked easy (To me) Questions and have to ASK one of HIS IT guys for the answer because he had no clue.

But to the OP, I had that experience once, But went to BOTH interviews, was accepted for BOTH jobs, but I took the lesser paying one, which was better work conditions and the manager didn't give a domeneering handshake and made you feel submissive.
The domeneering handshake instead of both palms being vertical, his was horisontal wanting YOU to turn your palm UP to meet his and be submissive, I grabbed his hand from above, he squirmed at that one and I Smiled when I shook his hand like that. But didn't take the job he was offering :)

Astro

I like this thread. Probably should get your own website :)

AstroBoyAU writes...

Hell who hasn't gone to work in Jeans and T-Shirt doing IT support.

Actually, looking back on it all, I don't think I have. Which I freely admit is a little odd-seeming. But most of the places I worked had a dress code which mandated something better-quality than a t-shirt, even when it was Jeans Friday or whatever.

Even now I'm working for myself and do a large number of hours at home, I find that I have a mild preference for loose polo shirts over tees.

I still agree that it's silly to mandate that Support teams with no in-person customer or deskside assistance should have to wear suits and ties. Make a comfortable dress code a perk of working for IT.

moody writes...

Priorities. If you can spend several thousand on a computer. You can spend $500-1000 on a good suit that will last you a life time.

If you can spend $1000 on a good suit, you can spend $1000 on something else as well. That is my point.

The rest of your post (claims that we're posting silly shit included) is irrelevant to my argument as I said "unless it is absolutely required for the job."

When I was working in IT we had to wear the suit when walking in and out of the office. Rest of the day the jacket sat on the back of the chair.

In the end the company changed the policy and said as long as its not a forward facing client role and you dont go through the foyer you can wear neat casual. We immediately started going through the carpark

ratman writes...

In the end the company changed the policy and said as long as its not a forward facing client role and you dont go through the foyer you can wear neat casual.

Wish I'd had that at a couple of places. Practically everywhere I worked was its own IT building (or floor in a non-public building) where we not only never saw customers, we never saw anyone outside of the IT department itself.

However, the general rule was "Oh, but Top Management might decide to drop in for a visit!" coupled with an organisation-wide dress code that applied to everyone (except, apparently, the executives themselves and their personal assistants). Considering Top Management only ever dropped in for about ten minutes every two years to make sure the building was still standing, I think they could have survived the shock and horror of seeing employees wearing neat casual.

I didn't mind it all that much when the employer was paying enough so the techs could afford business casual (and drycleaning and whatnot). When they were paying peanuts, though, it was a bit much.

tikalal writes...

If you can spend $1000 on a good suit, you can spend $1000 on something else as well. That is my point.

You can spend as much as you want on anything. I just find it funny how people judge their priorities, spending heaps of computers, gadgets – but scoff and abuse (yes, abuse – but its really expected on this forum) when spending money on something that is going to help you with career progression. How you present yourself is a big deal. Spending $500-1000 on a decent suit is an investment.

moody writes...

when spending money on something that is going to help you with career progression

I guess it depends on the career. A tailored suit, $200 haircut and sports car might actually help the career of someone who's looking to be in sales or go-getter management. For someone who spends 99% of their career behind a computer screen in a secured facility, however, that same money would be more profitably spent on better hardware, more bandwidth, and specialist training courses.

In the same vein, if you're a self-employed general labourer, you may as well put the money towards a durable tray-truck, quality tools, building insurance, advertising, and so on. What use would a $200 haircut or a petabyte SAN be?

Geminii writes...

if you're a self-employed general labourer, you may as well put the money towards a durable tray-truck watch so you can turn up... on time or at all.

there. fixed it for you.

Off topic.

Day 1: Fly to Indonesia. Goto tailor. Choose fabrics, styles, and etc.
Days 2 – 8: Experience the joys of an Asian country.
Day 9: Final fittings, adjustments.
Day 10: Fly home with 10 new suits, a great suntan and feeling really relaxed.

Repeat as required.

Have change out of $5000, look great and impress all you meet. And, don't forget – 'Every girl crazy about a sharp dressed man'. ZZ Top

On topic.

That seriously sucks.

Blaman writes...

there. fixed it for you.

I've wondered before if there could be a way of scheduling unknown-length events better. It would apply to everything from service visits (cable, plumbing, repairs) to doctors' appointments. Whoever figured it out could make millions.

Unfortunately, I keep running up against:

1) The earlier appointments can be cut short to make the later ones on time, but that means the earlier ones may not be satisfactorily completed.

2) Longer time gaps can be scheduled to allow for overrun, but this means less events can be scheduled per day (resulting in lower income unless the prices are jacked up), and there's sometimes a lot of downtime.

3) Having multiple service specialists taking on a schedule can iron out the averages, but it doesn't work efficiently or cheaply when there's significant travel time from home base to the event sites or when there's only a limited number of service specialists. Or when there's walk-ins. And there's still the issue of non-attendance downtime.

About the only fix I can see is to oversupply the service providers and have a second, more flexible profit-generating activity they can engage in when downtime presents itself. For example, doctors being booked to spend an average of 80% of their week seeing patients and 20% on research, with the research time being paid for out of a different bucket.

Alternatively, have people booked further ahead and also ask them if they have any other earlier times they'd be available for if a slot opened up. Only really works to some degree if there's not a lot of travel time involved between service provider and consumer. More easily done in an event-dense environment.

I've made it happen before in at least one scheduling team, but that was because I was able to artificially increase the density and local clumping of the relevant data sets in a way which just happened to fit the capabilities of the service providers very well. It wasn't a general-purpose solution. Did get three times as many people seen and give the service providers a lunchtime longer than five minutes, though.