Questions were not well thought out and were pretty standard interview questions that most employer's ask. You can tell the lawyers interviewing don't interview much. Expect your routine questions you can google. I think interviews are a chance for both parties to ask and answer questions, which I don't think these lawyers appreciated. Things I was able to discern from the lawyers who interviewed me were that the company is very reactive, not proactive; translation = you'de be dealing with cleaning up mess from employees who are not trained on standard employment/hr policies and that don't minimize risk; the HR department is new and doesn't know much, resulting in more questions to the legal department; there are only 3 employment attorneys servicing 37,000 employees; translation - possible burnout; the legal department specifically does not have a process in place to implement its core values, including the value of compassion and treating employees like family; the legal department lacks diversity and (most) of the lawyers were very impersonal / stiff; one lawyer stated that what she liked least about the organization was that she was always moving at lightening speed; translation = heavy work load, possibly alot of meetings, and not enough people to do the work. Finally, 1 out of 6 lawyers mentioned work life balance, and 1 lawyer did not directly answer the question regarding how the department implements its core values. Finally, after 4 rounds of interviews, the legal department did not have the courtesy to let me know I did not get the position. I don't think this reflects the company's core values and shows that the department does not value other people's time. I think this company and in particular the traditional legal departments may want to reflect as a business on the changing shifts that are occuring in business and what modern day workers are looking for in companies if they want to attract qualified candidates and increase retention rates of skilled employees.
