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”.
Here it is:
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.
Comments
484
470
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.
425
541
Wow what an earth-shattering story. You're really pushing the envelope of legal journalism here RoF.
467
495
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.
431
482
Breaking News! Human error occurs.
Although the irony of that particular error is pretty special.
442
455
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.
463
489
You wood habe tought he had a spill cocker on his computer
452
468
GC won't be happy
415
478
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.
428
518
Nothing worse than the grammar police. Get a life.
461
465
I hope it was on yellow paper
408
505
Surely that was done in eror
437
480
Topsykretts - You mean syntax police, surely? ;-)
447
468
HR admin assistant makes mistake.
Wannabe paraweasal highlights error and appears entitled.
Firm could have handled PR better.
Normal law firm industry practice tbh.
436
483
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.
414
485
If it was an offer it should have been on pink paper
413
475
I is well clever. Me teacher told me when I was 15 that there was noffin more that they could teech me. Ali G