Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I'm under the impression that it really is that competitive. There is low turnover for AUSA jobs in "flyover country" and big city USAOs - SF, NYC, DC, Boston - are all flooded with great resumes so it comes down to a lot of luck and connections as much as credentials.
This is exactly right. I'm the AUSA on the hiring committee who posted above. We are inundated with resumes from amazingly qualified candidates. We have turned down more than one Supreme Court clerk in the last year.
GS scale does not play into it at all since USAOs are not on the GS scale. Anybody considering a job in the USAO should know that pay there is AD (administratively determined), meaning it is essentially up to the whims of the USA and First Assistant. In my office, nobody coming from outside the federal government starts above $90k. Nobody.
Wow. You'd probably get fewer resumes if you publicized that.
Maybe. I'm not aware of anybody turning down the job offer once they found out the salary though. Merit based raises are pretty steady, but nobody's getting rich.
To the other PP, we did interview the SCOTUS clerks before rejecting them.
Anonymous wrote:I am one of the PP who works in ATR. I am glad you were able to make a decision. I personally think the Division is a fantastic place to work with good camaraderie and great intellectual challenge. But, it doesn't really sound like the right place for you. Good luck in the future.
Anonymous wrote:Question for the hiring committee AUSA above: what do you think about candidates coming from relevant Main Justice components (per my earlier question about perhaps switching from ATR to Tax or Crim after my 3 year commitment) relative to relevant firm practices? The firm I would join has a very strong WC group with 7-8 former AUSAs as partners.
How does the prior commitment to service play into it?