First.

Great story. HHs are slime...

Is it always this bad? Because I had dreams of people woo'ing me to a better place once I actually start work.

Google should be FIRST!

Is it always this bad? Because I had dreams of people woo'ing me to a better place once I actually start work.

Maybe the author should have googled the recruiter BEFORE lunch. Explains those law law school grades.

Wow! ALT readers would be much better off with LATERAL LINK--$10K bonus, no bogus lunch, no Bob.

First.

So I'm guessing the candidate here was a female. Free lunch or not, why would a female go out one on one with a male HH?

Sounds like the female was a whore trying to to get a free lunch and got what she deserved (the HH copped a feel).

good story.

why do you have lunch with him in the first place idiot.

If I were a male HH, I would aggressively pursue female candidates, especially ones with pictures on their websites so I can see if they are decent.

Then I would promise free lunch, weasel my way out of it, hit on her, and cop a feel at the end.

Besides the lack of money, the life of a male HH taking advantage of dumb female lawyers like this lady is fun!

Interesting theory 4:03(4). Lat, can you confirm the gender of the writer?

4:07: It's not a theory, it's obviously true from the post. The female lawyer was dumb for going out one on one with a male HH (Especially one she never met before, but nevertheless, if you are happily married you shouldn't go out on one with people like scummy HH's).

A more interesting story would be real stories about male associates banging hot female HH's who give it up in the hopes of gaining an easy to place client and make that quick cash.

If a hot female HH is going to make $50-100k off me (could happen for mid-level to seniors), she should definitely be my sex slave for a night. Fair trade off for the minimal work she does.

good story.

too bad the commenters want to psychoanalyze it. dudes, the writer is obviously female. how many male headhunters tell other guys how 'pretty' they are? get a clue!

Of course it's a woman. She recommended seafood, not a steakhouse.

trust me, this was a much better outcome then you going to JD. you DO NOT want to go to JD.

one question though, did this guy still get an offer at the end of the summer? haha

Wow. Not all HHs are slime, but Bob certainly is. I guess the lessons are: google BEFORE lunch (or anything else more than a phone call you didn't initiate); and don't waste time on HHs that don't seem to know anything useful. It sounds like Bob was slimey long before lunch.

4:11: It still begs the question why a married female lawyers would go out to lunch one on one with with a male HH.

She was trying to get a free lunch, so she's a whore and got the groping she deserved.

(The point is there was no reason for lunch, they could have just talked over the phone, but SHE agreed to the lunch in hopes of getting a free lunch from a male, hence she's a whore).

4:15, not getting enough sex in college still biting at ya?

please. this is ridiculous. Just because the lawyer is a woman she can't go on a recruiter lunch?
what is this, a right wing christian college rule?

What is up with these comments? Why is the writer a whore all of a sudden? That makes no sense. I'm a dude, not married, but if I go to lunch with a legal recruiter once I get married am I a whore as well??

If you're happily married, you can't meet a male for lunch at a public place for business purposes? What if a male JD partner had called her directly and asked to meet with her about a position over lunch--should she say, "Only if we are accompanied by a chaperone because I am happily married." It's not like she met him on the sly at a motel.

4:18:

No but she went only to get a free lunch from a male HH, and then is complaining when he hits on her and cops a feel. She got what she deserved. She could have talked to him over the phone for everything, but she took up the offers for lunch to get something out of it.

Well they both got something out of it, didn't they? bwahahaha

Um, she's not a whore because she went to lunch with a recruiter.

Why anyone would want their resume to come via laterallink so that their new/prospective employer knows that they are the kind of slimeball to pocket money from the firm on the back end is beyond me.

4:21: She's a whore for going out as a married women with a man she didn't know to get a free lunch.

By going out one on one with a male she didn't know, she asked for everthing that happened that night.

Wrong, Bob is definantly a woman. Look at the picture.

Wrong, Bob is definantly the woman. Look at the picture.

4:24 God thinks she shouldn't have tried to extract a free lunch from a stranger, and the hitting on and the grope was deserved because of this.

Did you have make several turns while walking to the deli? If so, odd as it sounds, the HH may have been trying to be chivalrous, walking on the street side of the lady with whom he was walking. He sounds kind of scuzzy, but hey, no one's all-bad.

4:26, methinks that makes it even weirder.

I'm jealous of Bob for copping a feel and getting a free lunch from a sucker who is hopefully somewhat cute.

That is really frigging creepy. Jesus.

She should have known better but to go out with a STRANGER. Since she did I got a free lunch with hot chick AND I got to cop a feel which I will throw into the spank bank and it will last until I find another cute female lawyer looking for a free lunch.

hey look, all of the above posters are socially awkward freaks. look at them ooh and aah about a *FEMALE*!!! I bet they haven't been near a woman since their college days...of sitting next to them in class!

Had a friend who was a 7th year, had great credentials for a fantastic opening at Skadden. He went through LatLink and everything seemed great, the firm loved him and the 10K bonus was a nice little incentive. Little did he know that after he started and word got around that he had took the 10K basically from the firm's own pocket, lets just say lots of people weren't happy and he couldn't shake that stigma about him and its been 2 years now.

Lawpig - "had took?" Come on, man.

The weird thing is, when I started reading, I just assumed that the lawyer was a male, until I got to Part 8 (where Bob tells her she looks pretty). Makes my liberal self feel bad that I just assumed it would be a guy...

You're right 4:44. I'm gonna go Commando.

***VOTE FOR ATL***

http://www.abajournal.com/blawgs/blawg100/gossip

**VOTE FOR ATL***

I read the whole story thinking it was a dude, and that the HH was queer trying to make a play for him. (Calling him pretty, and then hugging him). Eewwww.

Maybe it was a dude.

If this were Saudia Arabia, she'd get 90 lashes for going out unaccompanied with a man who is not her husband. She's lucky she only got felt up.

I am a (soon to be former) HH and I have to tell you that I'm shocked at the ridiculous stories my candidates tell me about other HHs. Most appear to be greedy, otherwise unemployable bums out for a quick buck that end up making my life much more difficult that it needs to be. I'm GLADLY leaving a job that pays $125K+ for a 40 hr week because I'm sick of feeling like a bloodsucker by association. And unless you spent your grade school days riding a short bus, cold-calling busy NYC lawyers is probably the most mind-numbing, repetitive work one can do.

4:49 - - I agree. Let's take it up a notch:

Storm Shadow v. Zartan

Discuss.

Actually, it's pointless. Firefly owns them all.

4:15 - The point is, you are a huge d-bag. She is a whore because she is married and went out to lunch with a MAN and on top of that SHE DIDN'T KNOW HIM! How horrible!

This is the 21st century. There's nothing wrong with a married woman going out to lunch one on one with a man for business reasons. Who cared if she just wanted the free lunch? 4:15 is obviously the kind of douche who won't let women he dates have male friends or, god forbid, go out to lunch one on one with them. And then he wonders why women always seem to cheat on him.

Alright 4:51......you can play too.

The tipster clearly works in Houston.

Did anyone consider this may have been a ploy just to get this girl out on some kind of "date?" Just think about it: grimey old guy surfing associate webpages, finds one he likes, calls her incessently and then takes her to lunch on the premise that it's a "HH" meeting.

4:54,

I thought *everyone* considered that, it apparently being the point of the anecdote. Some insight you bring to the table, dumas.

On a serious note, I wonder how much harder it is for older unattractive male recruiters to be successful.

I'm purposefully ignoring all the "she asked for it" trolling crap above.

oh my god, 4:54, you've cracked the case. good work!

4:56

Considering I have actual work to do, I decided to forego reading the 77 comments that preceded mine.

Good luck retaking the bar!

Does hugging someone really count as copping a feel? I mean, I hug my mom when I see her. Have I felt her up then? I'm a bit skeeved right now.

Has anyone considered whether or not it makes sense to ask whether anyone has considered something before reading comments to see what those others have considered? I'm far too busy and important to read the comments and find out. I will, however, respond quickly to anyone who disparages my question, because I'm not too important or busy for that.

How does laterallink work? How do the firms know you were hired through lateral link and how is the 10K paid by lateral link to you from the firm's pocket?

4:54,

What sort of real work do you have? Telling your partners that, according to your research, structured finance is not doing so well?

Also, I've prepared a comeback for your witty quip implying that I failed the bar. I'm a bit nervous, but here it is... You are a stupid douche bag and I did not failed the bar. There.

the money laterallink pays you comes from the money the firm pays them.

your resume gets submitted to the firm by laterallink, on laterallink's letterhead. every recruiting person, every partner looking at your resume knows you're that guy.

What I've learned from this thread:

Tipster works in H-town
Tipster is married female
Tipster wanted free lunch
HH is fat, grey, horny and a thief
HH got free lunch and a feel
Tipster feels dirty and used

I'm giving this round to the HH

Back to work.

4:56,
"You are a stupid douche bag and I did not failed [sic] the bar"

Mistah you needs to speak to da more engrish pleeze ok thanks

www.engrish.com

Fleshypeddler, you amaze.
I, too, am a legal recruiter, and spend much of my time diffusing the shitty things that other scumbag recruiters have done to associates. However, their are scumbags in every profession, and I disagree that recruiters are blood suckers. You are paid (very well) to find excellent attorneys with very specific backgrounds, and in many cases have the opportunity to help attorney's make an upward move, or get there career back on track when the firm is performing poorly.
If you feel like a scumbag, you probably are. But our clients hold us in high regard for filling their lateral positions that they otherwise wouldn't be able to fill, which will lead to higher billable hours for the other atty's in the group.
If you cold call attorney's all day that aren't interested, you're not very good at your job, huh? Do some god damn research before you waist their time, so that the calls you make are helpful.
I bet you're going to HR, douchebag

5:13,
Is there any way you can give the 10K back to the firm or refuse it in a blatant way that the firm knows you didn't take their extra referral money? What are you supposed to do in that situation (besides avoiding lateral link)

laterallink's entire marketing strategy is based on that 10k redistribution. it's what people associate with them. plenty of other search firms out there that won't taint you that way.

5:11

"...I did not failed the bar. There."

I did not failed it either. We is both be smart.

God help you.

um i really hope all the freakish sexists on here are kidding. shes a whore for going to a business lunch with a man (according to the story he was the one who pushed for the lunch, btw, she just agreed to it. and if i were going to work with a headhunter to get a new job you better believe i'd want to meet them in person)? where are we, saudi arabia? i guess since she's a "happily married woman" she should be sitting at home in the women's quarters under a black abaya without a drivers license or the right to vote?

5:17 - - Do you clients hold you in high regard because you don't know the difference between "their" and "there?" Thems must be some kind of clients.

why is everyone shitting their diapers over lateral link? It's not like it costs the firm any more than any other HH service, and I would rather the $ go to the lawyer than the HH anyway.

Also, if there's so much stigma surrounding Latlink, why would the firm use it? If you hire someone through latlink, you already know the game.

Dear recruiter -

Your posts use's of apostrophe's drives' me insane.

"she should be sitting at home...without a drivers license."

In my experience, women drivers are much more aggressive than men and much more likely to cut you off in traffic, proceed before their turn at 4-way stops and drive Range/Land Rovers.

Incidentally, I've never (NEVER) had anything but an unpleasant experience with anyone (most likely a woman) who drives a Range/Land Rover.

Why would it make any difference to the firm if you got some of the referral fee? They pay the same amount regardless. If anything, they should think you are smarter for getting a cut of the money while upgrading your job.

fleshypeddler, pushing paper at a large law firm is repetitive and mind numbing which is why many lawyers leave or want to leave the practice. If you have to leave a job because you feel like a bloodsucker by association then you obviously worry too much about what people think of you and probably aren't good at what you do. My recruiting colleagues are much smarter than some of the law firm attorneys I talk to.

lawyers and law firms are freakishly obsessed with appearances. why would you risk a partner thinking something smells bad about your arrangement with latlink? which is why the word on the street is that not all firms are working with them.

Recruiter-
You may be good at your job, but you suck at spelling. "waist'?!

In my experience as a recruiter, I often find that it's the scumbag associates who are hitting on me while I am trying to discuss their career and job opportunities.

The problem with latlink is that the $10K influences an attorney's decision to join one firm over another. The wrong reason to make a lateral move. If the attorney that joined Skadden had a similar offer from a Latham or a Paul Weiss, but latlink only submitted them to Skadden, the wine has been tainted. That does not bode well for making a long term commitment to a firm, as many people figure that even though they don't care for the partners, they can suck it up because $10K will ease the pain. Latlink is basically bribing us to use them

i smell autoadmit. run.

Well I worked with Lateral Link and I thought they were very professional. I even had an offer from another law firm through a recruiting firm that did not have a 10K bonus. I went with the offer through Lateral Link and the Lateral Link recruiter was not pushy. The Lat link recruiter even told me to seriously consider the other non-lat link offer. I made the best decision for me regardless of the 10K bonus.

In response to 5:43, do you think firms would feel better about the $10K bonus to the associate if they were paying latlink less overall? So they pay a normal head hunter in the $50s, but latlink takes half that, then gives $10 to the associate?

Lateral Link also gave me a referral bonus because they were able to place one of my friends. In fact, I can get a referral bonus just by being part of the network (without making a move) and referring a person that they can/do place. Because of the 10K bonus, my LL recruiter knew that he did not have to be pushy unlike other recruiters I have worked with.

Recruiting fees are large, and it's somewhat commendable that latlink gives a chunk to the associate. But, in the end it skews the thought process. No way around it

i think the issue is that it is a kickback. which, no matter how you play it, is not kosher.

I want to talk more about the whore.

And here we all are, debating it, which means that there are people out there who think it's sketchy. All you need is one partner who thinks it's icky and it's over. And you will never know why you got dinged.

I'm pissed at this storyteller for disrespecting Bob like this.

I wonder if the people who dislike the alleged "kickback" were screened out by Lateral Link...

(not a Lateral Link troll, just trying to decide if I want to use them, and trying to figure out motivations here...)

5:11

"...I did not failed the bar. There."

I did not failed it either. We is both be smart.

God help you.

"Free lunch or not, why would a female go out one on one with a male HH?"

Yeah! Those damn kids, what with their jukeboxes and poodle skirts and bobby socks and the jitterbug!!

*hip breaks from the strain of still being alive*

@6:10

I don't think its a matter of those screened out by LatLink, since those screened out by them will be screened out by all others. I've played this game before as an Associate in real estate. At the end of the day, after taxes, that 10K will be more like 5K. Besides, LatLink doesn't have relationships with all the firms because of the 10k arrangement so if you want maximum exposure to the best firms you'll have to work with someone else anyway. Might as well work with a recruiter who has all the openings. In the end, why would you risk a career hiccup for all of 5K and no convenience? Doesn't make sense.

I would rather get a 10K kickback for accepting an offer then deal with a pushy recruiter trying to tell me to accept an offer. Most lawyers are capable of making the right decision regardless of a 10K bonus. Even if Lateral Link did not place me I would refer them someone they could place and get the referral bonus. I wonder why no one thought about doing this before. And they only started calling me when I told them I was interested in moving firms.

If Bob were a Ninja (which he clearly is not), he would have whipped out his guitar and wailed on it until she agreed to give up her resume.

Lawpig, I worked with three different recruiters and all of them had different openings. No recruiting firm has all the openings and anyone who says they do is lying. 5K after taxes can still buy me some nice stuff.

I know several attorneys who have worked with Lateral Link, mostly HLS grads. They seem to have solid relationships with firms. Check out their advisory board and testimonials.

Why do people think firm's care about the 10K from LatLink? Firm's have huge budgets for recruiting and they are paying the money out either way - I say if it is my resume that gets me the job, why should a headhunter get all that money? I'm not looking to move, but to me it would be a no brainer to use them.

i went to law school and loved it. thanks for the great memorie$ whittier law. truly grateful. no, seriously.

lawpig sounds like a disgruntled recruiter. i think lat link started less than 2 years ago, so your Skadden friend sounds more like you - bored and disgruntled. maybe you should check out the bios. there are some hotties on lat link's site.

Lawpig HH is right, that Chis Gober guy has a nice Tex A&M jawbone.

Another reason to work with Lat link: great looking recruiters and a 10K bonus (pre-tax, of course). What more do you need?

i think i will use laterallink to setup a lunch with tex a&m. i am hoping to give up the 10k for quality time. also, FRAT STUD. do you have a website?

who is Lateral Link?

Um, lawpig, based on the testimonials and the list of recent placements on the LatLink website, it looks like Skadden's a repeat customer . . . so who're the "lots of people" who "weren't happy" about LatLink?

(Other than Bob.)

yeah, FRAT STUD. I bet tex a&m is way better looking than you and probably smarter too. wish tex a&m would have been my recruiter at Lat Link.

I am a recruiter for a large well known firm in San Francisco and I have been extremely pleased with the resumes LL gives me. Working with Lateral Link Group has given me the ability to get top quality resumes--so much so that I look at those resumes before I look at the other submissions first because they are better quality always. The money our firm pays for a fee if we take a candidate is such a small amount for our firm overall. It's also much smoother working with a seasoned recruiter. So, that's my two cents so far on working with Lateral Link.

Again, who is Lateral Link?

I don't think that lateral link's 10K bonus is such a bad idea. Why would the law firm care if their new attorney took 10K out of a commission to a recruiting company that they were going to have to pay anyway? I haven't heard that there is a stigma attached to that, rather it would seem that potential employers would want an opportunist to work for them. Usually opportunists are smart and good workers. If I move, I'm using lateral link - why not take the money and run? Firms are paying it anyway - why would they care who gets it?

I'm a 3rd yr IP litigator at a firm paying market. If I make a lateral move using a headhunter, the HH is going to get a fee of around $40k, right? And if I make a lateral move using a referral from an attorney at the new firm, that attorney will probably get between $10k-$20k as a referral bonus. At least, that's what I hear, and what my firm does.

So if I can get into a firm without a referral of any sort, headhunter or attorney, can I negotiate a signing bonus for some of the $$ they would have spent on recruiting costs? Anyone know if firms will play that game once you've got an offer?

I don't think that lateral link's 10K bonus is such a bad idea. Why would the law firm care if their new attorney took 10K out of a commission to a recruiting company that they were going to have to pay anyway? I haven't heard that there is a stigma attached to that, rather it would seem that potential employers would want an opportunist to work for them. Usually opportunists are smart and good workers. If I move, I'm using lateral link - why not take the money and run? Firms are paying it anyway - why would they care who gets it?

403: Are you joking? Why would a female go out with a male HH? Um, because if the guy had been legit it would have been just another business lunch of sorts. Or do you tell your partners that you won't go meet clients alone who are are your opposite sex?

I am a recruiter for a large well known firm in San Francisco and I have been extremely pleased with the resumes LL gives me. Working with Lateral Link Group has given me the ability to get top quality resumes--so much so that I look at those resumes before I look at the other submissions first because they are better quality always. The money our firm pays for a fee if we take a candidate is such a small amount for our firm overall. It's also much smoother working with a seasoned recruiter. So, that's my two cents so far on working with Lateral Link.

I am a recruiter for a large well known firm in San Francisco and I have been extremely pleased with the resumes LL gives me. Working with Lateral Link Group has given me the ability to get top quality resumes--so much so that I look at those resumes before I look at the other submissions first because they are better quality always. The money our firm pays for a fee if we take a candidate is such a small amount for our firm overall. It's also much smoother working with a seasoned recruiter. So, that's my two cents so far on working with Lateral Link.

All I know is that my friend used Lateral Link to go to another big firm and he got the job, had nothing but good things to say about them, and is 10k richer than I am for using my idiot HH who gave me nothing, and I am still miserable billing away. I could have a loaded used civic 02' with that 10k.

I used Lateral Link and other recruiters. All the other recruiters went ballistic when they heard that LL gives 10k. "Unethical", "Illegal", etc. Fact is they cannot compete, and are piling on this board saying the same things. I used Lateral Link and they had all the postings everyone else did (recruiter has to ask before they submit). So LL would say "how about Simpson Thacher?" and Recruiter 2 would ask same thing. Firms could care less if you use Lateral Link, the extra 10k is coming out of LL's pocket (frankly you look smarter). 10k really isn't that much money after taxes, but then you have to wonder why other recruiters don't pay it.

7:23 -- I know that a headhunter can negotiate on my behalf. Salary will be market, so the only negotiation is over a signing bonus. It seems like if I'm saving the firm $40k on HH fees, they might be a little more generous in what they'd give me. Hypothetically it looks something like this:

With HH: $40k to HH, $10k signing bonus to me. Total cost of hire: $50k.

W/o HH: $25k to me. Total cost of hire: $25k.

In the second scenario, I win and the firm wins (yes, some HH I don't know theoretically loses).

Economically, it makes sense. But it might seem a little aggressive or tacky, so I don't know if it's actually possible. Or if it would rub people the wrong way.

7:14 -- I had that exact situation. I used a recruiter and got some offers. Then I found a top firm on my own. Got an offer and negotiated signing bonus. But, as most recruiters will tell you, the money comes from different pots -- if they save money on recruiting budget, they are "happy", but that is not pool that pays signing bonuses. This does not make perfect business sense (other than "different pots of money") but if you work at a law firm you know this makes PERFECT sense (or lack thereof).

good./7:41

I understand the different pots of money. "Yes, you can take the summer associates to Bangkok for an 'off the record' weekend. Just get a receipt, and be sure to take some antibiotics with you. No, you cannot get a 20 inch monitor. And no more donuts on alternating Fridays -- once a month now."

Did the different pots of money problem prevent you from getting a better signing bonus? Or are you just putting that out there as a possibility?

Please vote on best post of the day:

1) parapalegic spanking story

2) "while spanking bare bottom..my finger slips in his anus"

All the people who think that women who go to lunch one on one with a man is a whore should move to Saudia Arabia - then you can call her a whore AND gang rape her AND have her sentenced to flogging and jail for complaining about it.

Please vote on best post of the day:

1) parapalegic spanking story

2) "while spanking bare bottom..my finger slips in his anus"

I LOVE THIS VIKING, NINJA, COMMANDO MUMBO JUMBO. I LOVE IT!

flog me

flog me

Am I confused? Does headhunter mean male prostitute?

I thought HHs were supposed to find you a job.

The real question is can we all do one better than Lateral Link? Get 20 people looking to move, set up a sham HH shop, kick the whole fee back to our nefarious selves.

I've used Lateral Link and several other recruiting agencies too. Lateral Link is one of the few places that employs recruiters who aren't even lawyers. These were basically kids who had just graduated from undergrad. They had no idea what they are doing. They have a good idea in theory but they didn't impress me at all. I also don't appreciate receiving mass emails from them advertising corporate law jobs when I do litigation. I predict they will be out of business within a year.

LL no good, I don't know about the mass e-mail thing. I only get e-mails about jobs in the fields I clicked on. Just log in and unclick the corporate stuff.

Seriously, though, raise your hand if you're not an HH mole.

Raise your balls if you _are_ an HH mole, cuz they've gotta be huge for you to be talking about ethics in all those posts about the $10K.

I used an HH who actually scouted out a position for me that was not a currently open/advertised position, due to personal connections. He had a very intuitive sense of the market, was honest about which firms were not good to work at, and even though I am female he remained very professional and did not hit on me or take me to a cheap ass place and then stick me with the bill.

With that having been said, before I decided to use said HH, I had spoken with a different female HH from a large, well-known firm. I told her multiple times that I was not interested in going to work for a branch office of a firm based in X city, due to my negative experiences at my current firm, which was a branch office of a firm based in X city. I kept telling her this because she kept trying to get me to apply to multiple positions, even involving a practice group switch, at another branch office of a firm based in X city that was less well-known and well-respected than my own crappy firm. One day I was talking to one of my law school classmates, and it turns out that the same HH had scheduled an interview on his behalf at the same firm without even getting his permission. For obvious reasons, an HH-bashing session made me think of her.

Lat! Do a comparison of signing bonuses! 10K can' be the end of it can it? I'd love to hear how much people are getting (and their seniority)

Also, request for some pieces have to do with the Asian market.

I heard some 5th year people from O'Melv's Asian practice got recruited to be partners at other firms (V50) in their Chinese offices.

10k seems like chump change compare to those kind of incentives.

I used Lateral Link, and they broke into my house and stole my infant.

That said, they placed me with a great firm, and I did not feel any stigma within the office after the move. Also, the $10K was a nice bonus.

All in all, I recommend it.

(Also, that whore story is pretty funny)

I'm Bob. I'm sorry for everything. Goodbye.

LL no good, you are really stupid. If you look at Lateral Link's website, pretty much all their recruiters practiced law and went to top law schools. By the way, many legal recruiting firms were started by non-lawyers. You don't need to be a lawyer to be a legal HH.

Ok LL , oh I mean, childcare. We know that a good recruiter can either be a lawyer or a non lawyer. We're all smart here, everyone knows the ups and downs from our arguments all day long, so let me ask you this question - there are so many intricacies that have to deal with our own career paths, how many of you are ready to take the chance and let you get fucked with an additional time for a measly 5K, is the risk/reward ratio appropriate? If their system is so good why aren't about 65% of NYC firms accepting resumes from them?

Probably because 65% of NYC firms aren't hiring. It's layoff season.

babysitter, oh I mean, HH mole, where does your 65% number come from?

is it, perchance, your buttocks?

why sir, I say, it is my rather overly supple buttocks. here is a scone for guessing!

/not babysitter

?

i love the lateral link and the david lat for endorsing them as atl's placement partner. a coincidence? lat = lateral link. call me a conspiracy theorist, but i am thinking atl = lat = lateral link = free press. and, btw, i am pretty certain majority of firms work with lateral link. looks like they just hired a gd&c recruiting director. i think if lat = good, that gd&c recruiter = really good. so, everything else being equal, i cannot think of a reason not to use lat = leateral link, 10 seconds after i get my bonus.

1:01 sounds like a viking mole to me.

Free Bob!

Am I the only one to think that it was clearly inappropriate for a married woman to do this? Surely she must have known that recruiters would not take random male associates to lunch and that the guy specifically asked her out with something not quite business related in mind. I get calls from recruiters every day and haven't yet received a lunch invitation, requests to meet are always at the recruiter's office.

And not only that, but why would she even expect the guy to pay for her just because she is female? Obviously males would pay for lunch/dinner on a date, but I never heard that males had to pay for women's lunches in a business context as well.

"Am I the only one to think that it was clearly inappropriate for a married woman to do this?"

No, but most here are not thinking about the issue properly. Business lunches are fine, even if they are one on one male with a female. The problem is this is random HH scum that keeps calling. She didn't know the guy well enough to have lunch with him one on one, period.

People are really serious about the inappropriateness of this because it's a "married female" going to what she thought was a business lunch? Is this 2007 or 1950? I agree she probably should have looked into his background (alleged recruiting company, etc), but it's perfectly common for salespeople to take potential clients to lunch. And of course you expect the salesperson to pay . . . don't attorneys pay when they are soliciting clients? People are so focused on the lunch thing. What if he had a fake office for the meeting and fake company website that she checked and was still a scumbag? What if it was her sleazy client that did this? Then is she ok or is it just inappropriate for married females to have business meetings with males...

you guys, come on! i take associates out to lunch all the time. doesn't mean i want to have sex with them.

it's quite a common occurrence for a male to take a female to lunch, believe it or not. and the notion that some people seem to have -- shocking to me, it being 2007 -- that women and men apparently should not be having business lunches together is Glass Ceiling 101.

What the fuck is the matter with you people?

You guys ever consider that he just wanted to go to lunch with her, and the whole headhunting thing was just a pretense!?!?

When choosing a recruiter, I've found it's always best to choose one who was a lawyer and who has credentials at least as good as mine. There are a lot of recruiters out there who are non-lawyers who barely understand the legal profession and who view themselves as salespeople and not as legal services professionals. I'd recommend you make sure you check out their schools, their bar admission (which would have saved the writer of the story immediately) and who take a big-picture, strategic view of your job search in the larger context of where you want your career to go. At the very beginning, ask the potential recruiter if they are a lawyer themselves and if yes, ask them in which state they are barred. Then you can easily check them out. In California for example, all you need to do is go to the state bar website and pop in their name to verify their status, find out their schools, etc. It only takes a couple of minutes.

As for LateralLink, I think the main reason to be wary of them is that they are making everything about the money right up front. The truth is, they are positioning themselves as salespeople to you from the beginning, and that suggests that they want to turn your search into a deal that needs to get done rather than working with you as a person who first and foremost needs career advice. That's why I avoided them -- it's not worth taking $10k up front to potentially be steered in the wrong direction.

10:10 = Bob

When choosing a recruiter, I've found it's always best to choose one who was a lawyer and who has credentials at least as good as mine. There are a lot of recruiters out there who are non-lawyers who barely understand the legal profession and who view themselves as salespeople and not as legal services professionals. I'd recommend you make sure you check out their schools, their bar admission (which would have saved the writer of the story immediately) and who take a big-picture, strategic view of your job search in the larger context of where you want your career to go. At the very beginning, ask the potential recruiter if they are a lawyer themselves and if yes, ask them in which state they are barred. Then you can easily check them out. In California for example, all you need to do is go to the state bar website and pop in their name to verify their status, find out their schools, etc. It only takes a couple of minutes.

As for LateralLink, I think the main reason to be wary of them is that they are making everything about the money right up front. The truth is, they are positioning themselves as salespeople to you from the beginning, and that suggests that they want to turn your search into a deal that needs to get done rather than working with you as a person who first and foremost needs career advice. That's why I avoided them -- it's not worth taking $10k up front to potentially be steered in the wrong direction.

This girl is an idiot. I cannot even remember the last time I went to lunch with a recruiter and didn't bang the hell out of him or her. What a wasted opportunity!!

You also want a recruiter that will keep abreast of your particular career track and keep you in mind when the best openings come up. No HH gains anything by sending you to a shop you may not be a good fit for both in terms of revenue and reputation. My experience with LatLink is that once the resume is submitted they will itch to get the deal done with the openings they have currently as opposed to another HH willing to send your resume to firms and practice groups that may not have openings per se but would like to see well credentialed candidates that may be a good fit.

This girl is an idiot! I cannot remember the last time I went to lunch with a recruiter and did not bang the hell out of him or her! What a wasted opportunity! Whore!

The recruiter I worked with at Lateral Link sent my resume to a firm without my say-so. That was that.

10:59: Absolutely. I've worked with great HH and terrible HH. The thing that sucks is that you're stuck with an HH for six months after they submit your resume. Has anybody else had trouble with this?

10:59: Absolutely. I've worked with great HH and terrible HH. The thing that sucks is that you're stuck with an HH for six months after they submit your resume. Has anybody else had trouble with this?

yes, you're pretty much stuck once the resume goes out. you can't undo it.

sure, lots of headhunters suck. low barrier for entry and all that.

you guys are smart. the key is to do your diligence. it's so worth it. ask for references from past placements. ask how much experience the HH has. ask if they are members of NALSC (admittedly toothless but nonetheless the only organization for us out there -- and there's a code of ethics).

most importantly, do NOT let anyone send out your resume without making it clear in an email that you want to have approval re every firm. and only to firms that have actual openings (or else you will have wasted your shot with the firm -- you can reapply later, but you're already in their system as a ding and people will know you have been looking for a long time, etc.)

all of which is to say: choose carefully and you can have a great experience with someone whose experience and guidance can actually be value added.

we don't all suck.

FLOG ME (Just don't EXECUTE ME!)

Love,

Gillian Gibbons

P.S. = http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23423342-details/Teddy+bear+teacher+appears+in+court+as+Islamic+fanatics+demand+execution/article.do

12:08 is obvioulsy CHUCK NORRIS!

MERMAIDS > CHUCK NORRIS

Mermaids are part human, part fish, topless, loud screeches and can hold breath forever (and talk underwater).

12:08 is obvioulsy CHUCK NORRIS!

MERMAIDS > CHUCK NORRIS

Mermaids are part human, part fish, topless, loud screeches and can hold breath forever (and talk underwater).

I am not saying that Muslims are irrational. But, should someone be flogged or executed for naming their TEDDY BEAR (i.e. stuffed animal) Mohammed? Thank God (Allah) that Gillian will have a "fair trial" in Sudan. That should work things out.

Teddy Bear Named Mohammed > Mohammed

Teddy Bear Named Mohammed > Mohammed

What do you call 10,000 HHs at the bottom of the sea?

A good start.

hey jay leno, isn't that actually a joke much more commonly used by people with "lawyer" inserted where you use "headhunter"?

funny/ironic that you would use it. a healthy lack of self-awareness is good, but you seem like -- what's the word i'm looking for? -- ah, yes . . . a moron.

Headhunter, thanks for the good tips.

11:43 = Bob.

12:51 = obtuse

1:21 = isosceles

1:27 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! That's so funny. You see, 1:21 called someone "obtuse," which is a euphemism for dull/stupid/gullible, but really describes angles. After that 1:27 called 1:21 "isosceles," which is a word that describes a type of triangle with two identical ANGLES!!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! So clever. 1:27 is SOOOOOOO clever. I can't believe it! One person used a term for angles, 1:21 used a term for triangles!!!!!!!!! It's SOOO good. Oh my god. And what's so funny is that it didn't even half to do with the main story. It's such silly random wacky humor!!!! 1:27 is the best!!! I hope you make more jokes like that in other postings!!!

Euphemism?

No, a euphemism is like when I call you "special" instead of retarded.

Zing

1:56 -- first funny comment to this story.

This blog is nothing but a bunch of headhunters. I feel like I just wasted a bunch of time reading crap about this HH marketing against laterallink, that HH talking against that other HH. What gives. Lat - make this blog exclusive to layers. These HH dont know jack about the profession and all they have to debate is whether laterall link is god's greatest gift next to a 2 pump mocha at starbucks or whether its not worth using that firm.