- law dawg
- 43 Comments
- 2775 Views
What are your thoughts and experiences when it comes to legal recruiters? Have you used them as the person looking for someone to hire? Was it worth the cost? Did it result in better quality candidates? For those of you who have been recruited, how did that work out for you? Did you actually get a job as a result of working with a recruiter? In a small market like Las Vegas, what do you do when a recruiter contacts you about a job that you have already seen posted? Do you think their involvement hurts you or helps you? On a related note, how have referrals worked out for you? Do you pay a bounty or finder’s fee when an attorney at your firm brings in someone else? Is there a quality difference in you find this way versus using a recruiter or just posting the job? What do you think the community needs to know about recruiters?
Shout out to the SHARK PIMP!
I was just about to page the Shark Pimp.
Whatever happened to Michael Belcher? He was relentless. He lied tons to prospects and would negotiate against you. But he was relentless.
He’s still around. I know he’s recruiting for a firm I recently left.
I have used recruiters in job searches before. I loved it frankly and took a lot of stress out of job searching. They found some positions i was not aware of and the recruiter did a lot of the ‘rigmarole’ of scheduling and getting interviews going and also negotiating salary. So when I left government after a long time the recruiter was great.
I found my current position just by getting asked over and it is an excellent spot. So I would say that if one does not have a lot of contacts (coming out of a clerkship, long time govt or switching areas of law) etc then the recruiter was the way to go. If i were to move to a different venue for some reason I would 1,000% use recruiters.
Let me give you a counterpoint- as the hiring partner for our firm, I probably would not have talked to you if affiliated with a headhunter because I would not have wanted to pay the recruiter to bring me your resume.
That’s a fair point. Setting aside what the fee (10K-15K?) Do the headhunter’s save much time on your end?
No. They market it as that they have a candidate who would not otherwise be available to firms because they have a candidate that would not otherwise be known but for prying them loose.
It is usually 20-30% of the annual salary for the open position. Plus, there is no real guarantee. If the person leaves or gets fired after 60-90 days, you are back to square one.
R.I.P. Liz Quillin
They should recruit judges. Sure it’d result in better candidates.
They do. There’s a whole signup in January, you must’ve missed it.
The DA clearly does recruit judges.
Clearly? Bold statement. Do you have some inside information you’d like to share? Because the truth of the matter is that the civil bar recruited DAs to run against some judges the bar has beef with. That had nothing to do with the DA.
There is an ADA running in almost every competitive department. I’m just reading the writing on the wall. But, it sounds like you are an insider with special knowledge, so I am sure you are right. It is the civil bar recruiting DAs.
9:33 is correct. It’s an open secret. What’s odd is how DAs without civil experience are being recruited and funded to run in purely civil departments. Sounds like a classic case of “f me” money in politics.
I found recruiters to be a waste quite frankly. Reason–many of them don’t have the account or the position but are amassing resumes to get it. Another concern is that they are looking to terminate someone and trying to find a better candidate. I had an experience with a recruiter recently. I kept telling them that I did not want to do debt collection. So they kept touting this position and what was it? Debtor side debt collection. On the other side of the ledger, the biggest challenge for recruiters is the lack of Nevada licensed candidates. They have plenty of interest but applicants don’t have the Nevada ticket. This is why having a difficult bar exam and austere licensing process
is so important. We could get over run in an instant if they allowed the floodgates of California and lawyers elsewhere to set up shop here. Bad enough as it is dealing with the California lawyers who picked up a Nevada licensed attorney in their L.A. Office.
The real barrier is the lack of waiving into Nevada. That is a line in the sand that should not be passed.
Waiving in or reciprocity is a cluster you know what. But there are so many exceptions to the bar exam. Started with Rural DAs, PDs, the Judicial College, then in house attorneys with “C” bar numbers (no exam), legal services and legal aid (outrageous half the lawyers there are not admitted by examination). The exceptions are as bad as reciprocity.
Partial list. I won a lunch bet on how many exceptions. Here are some there are others.
Rule 49.1. Limited practice certifications for certain attorneys; temporary certification for military spouses.
1. Eligibility. Notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 49, an attorney admitted to practice law in any other jurisdiction may apply for limited practice certification if the attorney is:
(a) Employed by the William S. Boyd School of Law and either (i) teaches in the clinical law program or (ii) provides pro bono or court-appointed assistance to clients;
(b) Volunteering with an Emeritus Attorney Pro Bono (EAPB) program or is an inactive member of the State Bar of Nevada and volunteering with an EAPB program, as defined in Rule 49.2;
(c) Employed by or associated with an organized legal services program approved by the Access to Justice Commission or its designee and funded from state, federal, or recognized charitable sources that provides legal assistance to indigents in civil matters;
(d) Employed as a deputy district attorney by a county whose population is fewer than 100,000 persons;
(e) Employed by the State Public Defender or the county equivalent of such an office to practice in a county whose population is fewer than 100,000 persons;
(f) Employed by the Nevada Attorney General;
(g) Employed by the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada or the Federal Public Defender for the District of Nevada;
(h) Employed exclusively as in-house counsel for a single corporation (including its subsidiaries and affiliates), association, partnership, or other business entity situated in or qualified to do business in Nevada, whose lawful business consists of activities other than the practice of law or the provision of legal services; or
(i) A spouse of a member of the United States Uniformed Services who is present in Nevada pursuant to military orders.
Yeah, but, don’t these limited practice certifications expire when the circumstance expires?
So, you can’t work for 6 months as a rural DA and then go into private practice unless you pass the bar.
If you have permanent employment in one of these jobs, sure you keep the status. But the whole point is to make sure these positions are filled with competitive candidates.
Agree. But where were you when the easy bar exam idea was floated, or later when the NSC was soliciting comments?
“You” in this context means the general bar membership, not just the OP.
6:25 PM–There were comments in opposition to the new fangled bar exam but they were few and far between Half the comments were from non licensed academics from out of state in support of the proposal.
I am hopeful that the new fangled bar exam–Foundation Law Exam and Performance test will thin out the herd. We shall see. No MBE. No essays.
What could go wrong. I am thinking the process might deter many. It is geared towards law students and Boydsters for sure. Practice submission.
RIP Martha (Marti) Ashcraft
She had been very ill for some time. How sad.
Did anybody see the law school rankings? Looks like Boyd took a significant hit.
Boyd shouldn’t really pursue higher rankings and applicants shouldn’t care about Boyd’s ranking. It’s the only game in the state. Do you want to practice in Nevada? You should go to Boyd unless you get into a top school. Do you not want to practice in Nevada? You shouldn’t go to Boyd.
It’s even more simple than that. Which path will lead you to graduation with no debt or little debt. End of story.
Yes! We need to be telling this to anyone and everyone who is considering law school. Very rarely does it make sense to attend a law school for its perceived prestige.
UNLV is $31,500 per year (in state). It has a 78% employment rate for 2024 grads. ASU tuition is $29,833 and 89% employment. Arizona is $26,612 and 80% employment. Utah is $35829 and 88% employment.
Obv if you get into all those schools, and are paying full freight, you don’t go to UNLV.
These rankings are stupid and meaningless. It’s embarrassing how much administrators and other fret over them.
Not sure this has been discussed, but Jennifer Isso is running for family court judge and has been referred to the state bar for discipline by multiple judges for misconduct. A panel has recommended suspension. One firm feels so strongly about her erratic behavior that they wrote a joint letter to the supreme court signed by all attorneys at the firm urging the the court to ignore the recommendation of the disciplinary panel to stay her suspension. see the supreme court record here
https://caseinfo.nvsupremecourt.us/public/caseView.do?csIID=73865&fbclid=IwY2xjawRDUgZleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETFnQTBRTDRCWk80MVN0Sm9oc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHn_Lj8d_M54OhesU-lQsOnIf9cPJnTm1lpwSDIGXA0hQfSBEJcE7R0s2bkD__aem_e4zl0zEZW8dcxsqvZxfz0A
I do not practice on North Pecos (thank Allah), and I have no idea who Jennifer Isso is. I did read the letter from the firm and find it to be deeply problematic. The letter makes very specific *factual* allegations against Isso, which include some that are quite inflammatory. The letter reads like a formalized Yelp! review. This is review of a disciplinary panel’s hearing, where due process and rules of evidence controlled factual determinations. Now, outside of, and after that framework, this firm makes allegations against Isso in a filing in front of the Supreme Court. Some of the allegations are quite incendiary, for example, that she has allegedly appeared in court via Zoom in various states of undress. What is Isso supposed to do with that here? Rebut these extra-judicial factual allegations made against her? How? By what standard? I don’t know Isso, don’t have an opinion about whether she should be suspended, but I do think filing that letter was a total bush move by that firm and I think less of them for having done it.
lol the first factual example they give of her unprofessional behavior is her “cutting her hair in her personal bathroom during oral argument.” They also cite her “speaking over the court and counsel.”
Yeah, attorneys shouldn’t do that. But I cannot believe multiple attorneys signed their names to a letter to the NVSC to complain about another attorney like that.
Is she related to attorney Peter Isso? If so, based on prior dealings with P. Isso, I am not surprised.
They are brother and sister
Two peas in a pod. Except she has actually made some money.
That letter is likely to disappear from the record. the request has been made and isn’t opposed.
Already locked.
The reference by multiple judges is far more concerning than the letter
I’m not the type to shop new jobs, so I appreciate every once in a while getting information about what’s out there. But I always let them know I’m happy with where I’m at.
They can often give you more information about the available position than you would walk away with after having interviewed–and I’m not interested in interviewing unless I’m already pretty aware of what I’m interviewing for.
Recently changed jobs after looking for awhile. Recruiters ended up being pretty much no help and kept pushing jobs that weren’t really a great fit because the recruiter didn’t know any better.