Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Interview in review

Today's interview wasn't bad.  It was pretty standard except for a couple of odd points.

First, it was apparently for a part-time position which would transition into a full-time position.  Now, I have no problem with this - I'll take just about anything right now - but, I do have a problem with not knowing this before the interview.

The guy had this quote, "...as you know from the Craigslist ad, this is a part-time position, transitioning to full-time."  No, actually, I had no way of knowing that.  Craigslist ads are anonymous, so I don't have any idea which ad got me this interview.  Funny how anonymity works, sometimes.*

Second, it was a pretty sparse interview.  All the guy did was tell me about the firm and then ask me some very superficial questions about my resume.  Seriously, he would look at part of my resume and then go, "Oh, you worked at _____.  What was that like?"  That was pretty much it.  If I get a second interview, I'm really curious what criteria that decision is going to be based on.

*I wouldn't even mention this were it not for the fact that this is like the fourth time an interviewer has referenced their anonymous ad.  Thanks, guys.  That's really helpful.


  1. idea, copy/paste url and text of ad at bottom of your reply. Dear X, I am writing to apply for the Y position, below. blabby blabby . . .

    fingers crossed for ya!

  2. I'd never considered that part of a blind ad - how could anyone keep it straight? Idiots.

    Blind ads are scary, anyway. When I was wistfully looking at the CL ads while employed, I was terrified I would end up applying at an opposing counsel's firm. (My city is small enough for that to happen.) *shudder*