A reader has written in to RoF to say that he was applying for a paralegal job at Clyde & Co when he noticed an outstanding typo in the job description.

He decided to do the right thing and sent an email to the firm’s HR department pointing out the mistake. “Within the hour they had corrected it without even so much as a courtesy email back.” And hell hath no fury as a paralegal scorned – “now I’ve been rejected for the job, feel free to publish this”. 

At the risk of making a rod for our own backs, here it is:


Clyde & Co


A spokesman for the firm said "whichever way you look at it (and spell it), attention to detail is important to us. We're sorry for this error and thank the candidate for pointing it out."

Clyde & Co joins other firms to have let a typo slip through the net with puerile, generous or possibly incriminating results. 

Tip Off ROF

Related News

This Week’s News

Comments

Gobblepig 18 October 19 08:21

Also, "Previous legal research is desirable" sounds like a request that candidates turn up with arm-loads of work-product belonging to their previous employers. 

Anonymous 18 October 19 09:43

It's a bit crappy for Clydes to only thank the candidate via a snarky response to RoF.  Have some grace, and at the very least they should have interviewed the candidate and made light of them spotting their "deliberate" mistake.

Instead they've now they've got bad PR and everyone assumes the HR folk rejected the candidate because they were shown up.  Not ideal.

Jack 18 October 19 09:53

Response to: Anonymous 18 October 19 09:43

Agreed they should have acknowledged and thanked the candidate sooner, but an obligatory interview is a bit of a leap. We have no idea whether the candidate has the requisite experience or attention to detial. 

Anonymous 18 October 19 11:02

Deaf Sid, Fuhrer to yours of the 17th, we egret to reform you that your wall nut be elected for interview.  You will depreciate that we deceive lottery hundreds of fabrications for each inviolable politician.  On this caucasion, you have filed.  Yaws fatefully, Clydes.

Anonymous 18 October 19 12:47

HR admin assistant makes mistake.

Wannabe paraweasal highlights error and appears entitled.

Firm could have handled PR better.

 

 

Normal law firm industry practice tbh.

Dearie 18 October 19 15:09

Massive heh at the typo which considering what they are asking for they can't seem to produce themselves.

Also interesting that the criteria essentially ask for trainee caliber candidates for a parasqueal - I thought this sort of behaviour had stopped. It's just outright underpayment for a better role.

Anon 21 October 19 03:16

I is well clever. Me teacher told me when I was 15 that there was noffin more that they could teech me. Ali G

Please note that comments are subject to moderation.