« Call for Nominations: AALS Administrative Law Section Emerging Scholar Award | Main | James Phillips on McCulloch and Gettysburg »

Thursday, August 25, 2022

Law School Hiring Spreadsheet and Clearinghouse for Questions, 2022-2023

I. The Spreadsheet

In the spreadsheet, you can enter information regarding whether you have received

(a) a first round interview at a school (including the subject areas the school mentioned, if any, as being of particular interest, and whether the interview offer was accepted);

(b)  a callback from a law school and/or accepted it; or

(c) an offer from a law school and/or accepted it; feel free to also leave details about the offer, including teaching load, research leave, etc. A school listed as "offer accepted" may have made more than one offer and may still have some slots open.

Law professors may also choose to provide information that is relevant to the entry-level market.  

Anyone can edit the spreadsheet; I will not be editing it or otherwise monitoring it. It is available here:

II. The Comment Thread

In this comment thread to this post, you can ask questions about the law teaching market, and professors or others can weigh in.

Both questions and answers can be anonymous, but I will delete pure nastiness, irrelevance, and misinformation. If you see something that you know to be wrong, please feel free to let me know via email, sarah*dot*lawsky*at*law*dot*northwestern*dot*edu.

You may want to take a look at the many questions and answers in the threads from 2014-20152015-20162016-2017, 2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022. In general, there's quite a cache of materials relevant to the law job market under the archive categories Getting a Job on the Law Teaching Market and Entry Level Hiring Report.

 

Posted by Sarah Lawsky on August 25, 2022 at 08:36 AM in Getting a Job on the Law Teaching Market | Permalink

Comments

Commenting to move this up in Recent Comments again! If anyone is wondering why there aren't comments here, it's because they're all in the spreadsheet itself. Click over to there if you have questions or want to chat!

Posted by: Candidate X | Nov 18, 2022 11:32:19 AM

Has anybody heard anything from some of the New England schools (especially BU, BC, UConn, Maine)? It seems that there was early activity but nothing recently.

Posted by: anon | Nov 7, 2022 10:23:19 AM

This comment is solely to keep this thread on the "Recent Comments" list

Posted by: anon | Nov 5, 2022 12:37:03 PM

To any committee members out there who may be watching this space, are any schools still actively reviewing direct applications (along with/or instead of the FAR) at this point? Or would it simply be too late to submit direct apps at this point?

Posted by: anon | Oct 31, 2022 2:40:30 PM

To any committee members out there who may be watching this space, are any schools still actively reviewing direct applications (along with/or instead of the FAR) at this point? Or would it simply be too late to submit direct apps at this point?

Posted by: anon | Oct 31, 2022 2:40:08 PM

hello worlddddd! hehe Thanks to the ones who re-opened comments!

Posted by: Bear | Oct 26, 2022 1:07:06 AM

Comments are back!

Posted by: AnonProf | Oct 25, 2022 5:29:21 PM

Tennessee is still finalizing some things. We plan to provide updates very soon to everyone. Apologies for the delay!

Posted by: TN | Sep 28, 2022 10:09:07 PM

I was also a Tennessee hopeful and was told that invitations for callbacks would go out last week. Having heard nothing, I assume that they remained on schedule and I will not be receiving a callback.

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 28, 2022 8:36:31 PM

Any updates on callback timing for Tennessee?

Posted by: Tennessee hopeful | Sep 28, 2022 7:54:20 PM

VAP thread posted--

https://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2022/09/vaps-and-fellowships-2022-2023.html

Posted by: Sarah Lawsky | Sep 28, 2022 3:40:41 PM

I know this isn't 100% the correct place to ask this, but seeing how the fellowships/VAPs thread isn't open yet: Generally when do fellowships start reaching out to applicants about interviews? I'm trying not to be anxiously neurotic but my brain keeps telling me "Oh, you submitted a few weeks ago and have heard nothing? Rejected." However, I'm guessing hiring committees don't really look at fellowship/VAP stuff until faculty hiring is over?

Posted by: AspiringLawProfessor | Sep 28, 2022 3:05:09 PM

I don't think the frustrations about the hiring process expressed by some candidates here are directed at the helpful appointments committee members who are sharing tips and advice and explaining how they make decisions. The frustration is with the message not the messengers. Explaining what are the unexpressed norms can be very helpful, because it clarifies what the expectations are. Frustration that they were unexpressed to begin with is not frustration at the expression of them. Quite to the contrary.

Posted by: beneficient | Sep 28, 2022 11:43:26 AM

To all of the candidates freaking out about the various weird pitfalls and inconsistent advice in this thread, I think it can be helpful to remember that faculty hiring requires a majority or consensus where you and the committee have to navigate a bunch of chokepoints.

The hiring committee and the people in your field almost certainly want you to succeed and don't care what color your suit is. But they need to get the votes of a bunch of people who are less invested or less involved, or who have some other agenda, like hiring in a different area or hiring a different kind of candidate. In that environment, sometimes stupid things can matter.

I'm not defending the stupid things, but I think as a general matter it's helpful to remember that a lot of the seemingly cruel or irrational behavior by hiring schools comes from the nature of collective deliberations, and attempts to build a consensus among a bunch of different people with strong job security and little accountability.

Posted by: HiringProf | Sep 28, 2022 10:06:46 AM

I would also like to express my gratitude (alongside @Grateful) to the professors that have provided guidance, insights, and tips on this blog. As someone who has been on the academic market in another discipline for close to a decade and served on search committees in another discipline, I can attest that other disciplines are not any clearer or transparent about hiring processes. It is extremely common to attend a campus visit a/k/a call-back interview and then not hear anything for months until after the person who was offered the job has signed their contract and onboarded. That "ghosting" can feel terrible, but committees really can't say anything to the other candidates until the person who was offered the job is under contract. What I appreciate about this community is that there does appear to be more organization and transparency on the hiring front. The spreadsheet and comments in this blog provide about as much insight into the job market as one can hope to get.

Posted by: old dog new tricks | Sep 28, 2022 9:12:06 AM

I personally would like to say thank you to the professors who have taken the time to share their thoughts and experiences on here. I may not always agree with all of the ways that the process works, but I'm extremely grateful to be going through the process with these insights rather than doing so blindly.

I'm happy to try and reform things once I'm on the other side of things, but at the moment I just really would like a job!

Posted by: Grateful | Sep 27, 2022 7:52:48 PM

@a non: Because it's been a buyer's market for such a long time, hiring committees take it for granted that it's the candidates place to grovel, and it's the committee's privilege to judge and gossip. Things seem to be changing, and perhaps one day it will be a seller's market, and it'll be the candidates who ding a school because someone on the committee didn't wear a suit (or worse, wore a blue suit!). But even if the market changed overnight, it'd take the culture some time to catch up. By the time the sewage gets flowing in the other direction, the candidates today will be on appointments committees. So, yeah.

Posted by: jarjarbinks | Sep 27, 2022 10:45:54 AM

"Since others are sharing PSAs -- here's another one..."


Oh god, here we go again. Do you tell all candidates they're no longer in the running, or do you, like many/most committees, just ghost them? Why is it OK to ghost candidates, but not committees? The candidates can figure out that you're not interested in them, so why can't you figure out they're not interested in you? Why isn't the onus on the candidate here, too: if you contact them and they don't respond within a reasonable time, just move on to others.

Gonna gossip about about how they didn't call you back...so they could take an offer at a better school? If this is somehow supposed to touch upon professionalism, how do you think that makes YOU look? Junior high school indeed....

Posted by: a non | Sep 27, 2022 9:43:48 AM

Since others are sharing PSAs -- here's another one: If a school reaches out to you about a callback, and you aren't interested, just say so. To basically ghost a committee trying to schedule callbacks and figure out if they need to replace you in the pool is seriously not cool. Even if you aren't interested in that school, there's no reason to jeopardize your reputation in the academy (as we do talk to people at other schools) by not responding to emails and voicemails.

Posted by: AnonProf | Sep 27, 2022 8:33:08 AM

"I'd love to hear from folks if a candidate should share an invite for a callback at one school with other schools where they have done screeners. I had heard to keep that close, but only disclose offers. I'd welcome other perspectives on this."

Yes, do this, assuming that (a) the school that has offered you the callback is one that might take you off the market sooner (as this tells other schools there's a deadline on considering you) and/or (b) it's a peer or better school (as this sometimes gets schools more interested, in a junior high school sort of way).

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Sep 24, 2022 11:16:37 PM

I think the moral of the story to all of these comments and conflicting advice is to be yourself and follow your gut. You want to end up at the school that wants you for who *you* are. Rock that primary color blue suit. Or even purple! ::gasp!:: If they don't like it, you might not be comfortable bringing your whole self to a place like that and is that really where you want to end up?

Posted by: clear as mud | Sep 23, 2022 8:24:55 PM

In fairness, I did observe sight of the suit firsthand. It was not navy. It was primary color blue. Loud. Still a pretty idiotic reason to ding a candidate. What is so difficult about focusing on teaching and scholarship when evaluating candidates?

Posted by: troublewithtribbles | Sep 23, 2022 7:08:08 PM

Has anyone heard from Stanford, Berkeley, USC, UCLA, or Irvine?

Posted by: anon | Sep 23, 2022 4:51:43 PM

What in gods name is wrong with a blue suit? Since when is it any less conservative or traditional or formal or whatever than gray?

Posted by: Obama looked good in the tan suit | Sep 23, 2022 7:22:03 AM

What about reaching out to a school either pre or post screeener with an updated cv that reflects new publications/acceptances for publications, plus updated address, plus additional service position?

Posted by: a-anon | Sep 23, 2022 4:31:17 AM

Well I for one think the color blue is a style-forward choice, and want it to be known that I will vote to hire anyone who shows up for a screening interview or callback in a nice blue suit (or other blue outfit). We need to set the right incentives here.

Posted by: professor at a highly, highly desirable school | Sep 23, 2022 1:28:16 AM

What AnonProf said. It seems to me profs are just trying to communicate the likely norms and mindsets of appointments committees in order to help candidates understand the process. In the old days, there was no advice and you just went in cold and guessed. Now there are message boards, and you can year from different people to get a sense of their best advice. But YMMV.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Sep 22, 2022 7:16:24 PM

If you are reading the various perspectives of different posters on here as “unwritten rules,” then you are not reading carefully. In what field will you not find individuals offering sometimes conflicting advice?

Posted by: AnonProf | Sep 22, 2022 6:12:08 PM

So, to sum up - there are unwritten rules of the job market and you definitely have to follow them or you will get dinged. Here are some of the rules:

1. Do not express your geographic preferences unless you have absolute restrictions.
2. Express your geographic preferences directly to schools, maybe, but only if the school is in an undesirable location but not in such a way that it seems like you only want the location for reasons other than the school.
3. Definitely don't say anything about whether you will or will not work in Alaska.
4. If you get a callback at a school, have your recommenders reach out to other schools so they are aware.
5. If you get a callback at a school, be an adult and reach out to other schools so they know where you are in the process.
6. Absolutely do not contact schools for any reason after a screener, even if you get a callback, unless you have an offer from another school.
7. Definitely write a thank you notes after screeners so that schools know if you want to be there, because direct applications and expressions of interest during the screeners are not enough.
8. Do *not* wear a blue suit.
9. *Do* wear a mask.
10. Do not ask for accommodations. The school will give them to you but they will not give you the job.

Posted by: clear as mud | Sep 22, 2022 6:04:13 PM

If I were a candidate, the only time I'd reach out is 1) I have already finished a callback interview and 2) you get an offer from another school. Doing so will prompt that school to move faster (if they are so inclined and if they can) so as to prevent losing you to that other school.

I see notifying a school of the mere fact that you have other callbacks as risky given that it can read as "other schools want me, so you should as well." Indeed, I'm often turned off by that, thinking "why should I care about the mere fact that you have other callbacks?" Also, if you report having received several callbacks, then the school might see you as a risk given that you could ultimately be fielding several offers, some of which could expire before they vote (i.e., schools don't like bringing back people they don't think they can get). Also, if your callbacks are at much lower ranked schools, the school might start to think that's a reflection on your candidacy and, thus, they should be pursuing other candidates with better credentials.

Thus, I'd only reach out if you've received an offer that has a deadline.

Posted by: AnonHiringChair | Sep 22, 2022 3:48:36 PM

Given the radically different timelines schools are following, I don’t think it needs to be “presumptuous” to notify a school of a callback elsewhere or that candidates need to play coy by having intermediaries reach out for them. Can’t we be adults and just say something like “Given that schools are operating on different timelines, I wanted to let you know that I have a callback at School X and I remain interested in your school, if I am still under consideration”, without having schools play mind games by reading into this (and apparently drawing negative inferences??)? Since some schools are extending offers before others have started screening, waiting to notify a school until you receive an offer seems like it risks being too late.

Posted by: anon prof | Sep 22, 2022 2:05:53 PM

@ Anon re reaching out to screener schools about callback invites. At my school the faculty advising candidates said this should be done, but by the candidate's recommenders rather than the candidate.

Posted by: anoncandidate | Sep 22, 2022 1:17:08 PM

PSA: thank you notes can help you. My school recently completed callback decisions and, when faced with a question of whether a candidate was seriously interested in us (which we often ask when we suspect a candidate will likely receive multiple offers), a good thank you note convinced us that at least a couple of them were interested enough to pursue.

Posted by: AnonHiringChair | Sep 22, 2022 12:42:13 PM

Do people really reach out with an update about callbacks? Seems a bit presumptuous

Posted by: Anon | Sep 22, 2022 12:41:03 PM

Do people really reach out with an update about callbacks? Seems a bit presumptuous

Posted by: Anon | Sep 22, 2022 12:41:02 PM

@committee member.... hit post too soon! Was trying to write that, at this point, it's probably safe to assume that at least some of the people you have screened have been invited for call backs at other schools.

Posted by: Advice? | Sep 22, 2022 12:18:01 PM

re @committee member's comment, I'd love to hear from folks if a candidate should share an invite for a callback at one school with other schools where they have done screeners. I had heard to keep that close, but only disclose offers. I'd welcome other perspectives on this.

@committee member, if it's helpful for your committee to know, the people you have screened

Posted by: Advice? | Sep 22, 2022 12:17:07 PM

I’m in our hiring committee this year. We are doing our best to give candidates a sense of timeline, but honestly, it is up in the air and partially dependent on our peer schools and how they progress. The best thing you can do is a candidate is try to not stress about timelines, BUT also make sure to keep schools updated. If you’ve had a screener with one school, but then get a callback at another, tell the first school you’ve gotten a callback. This can help them speed up the process for you.

Also know that, for many schools, a mysterious timeline is an advantage in hiring. Snatching a candidate early is advantageous for some schools, while waiting to see who gets multiple callbacks is advantageous for others.

Posted by: Committee Member | Sep 22, 2022 11:18:49 AM

Here to second the plea from anon posted at 9:22 a.m. Please, hiring committees, if you are allowed and at all able to do so, give candidates as much information about timing as possible. This includes explaining whether you are completing entry-level screening/hiring first and then moving to lateral, completing both processes concurrently, etc.

My experience this year comports with anon's claim. Some schools have already completed callbacks and are preparing offers in the near future, some have completed screenings and are close to announcing callbacks, some are just getting started with screeners, and some have expressed strong interest but given no timeline on when the process might begin (let alone conclude).

Posted by: Anon | Sep 22, 2022 9:37:08 AM

hiring committees, a plea:

timelines are a mess. some schools have started callbacks, some have scheduled them, some have yet to schedule them, and some are still doing screeners (or haven't even started).

it would be incredibly helpful to candidates if you told them in the interview, or your initial email requesting an interview, your expected timeline for callbacks, offers. everyone understands they might not get a callback, but it's much worse to sit around waiting to hear whether you get one without knowing anything about whether callbacks, offers have been extended.

thanks in advance

Posted by: anon | Sep 22, 2022 9:22:29 AM

No one is disputing whether a hiring committee has the prerogative to request in-person callbacks. What is aggravating and howlingly unfair are the innumerable "unwritten norms" that differ from school to school, which have nothing to do with research or teaching, which smug and lazy committee members use as a basis for filtering candidates. If you prefer in-person, then SAY it. Don't say totally okay to a Zoom callback and then sneeringly hold it against the interviewee when it's time to vote.

I've heard dozens of stories from appointments committee members at various schools dinging a candidate for reasons which amount to "He wore a blue suit to the interview, and a lot of us just thought that was weird" (no kidding, I actually heard this stated by a committee member at a very highly ranked school as a reason for dinging a guy). There would be no problems if hiring committees would simply TELL candidates what they wanted. Instead, candidates are left to chew their fingernails off with worry that some bored and temperamental pedant on the committee dings a person for using an oxford comma (or not using an oxford comma).

What matters? Supposedly teaching and scholarship. And yet there are thousands of stupid reasons—never stated expressly and completely unrelated to research or pedagogy—which can tank an interview. This toxic process would be so easy to fix. If you're on a hiring committee, then be upfront, take the work seriously, and don't be an asshole. Not hard. And yet, here we are.

Posted by: troublewithtribbles | Sep 22, 2022 8:53:55 AM

@Anon no tenure - of course candidates need to be able to teach in person. The suggestions were towards making in-person visits safer.

But even if the expectation is that everyone is teaching in person, which many people are still doing masked, the call back involves more than teaching. Call backs typically involve small meetings and meals. It doesn't seem unreasonable to consider a cautious approach to in-person call backs given the concern that has been expressed here.

Law professors were just tweeting last night about how challenging it is to make coherent arguments after getting Covid due to brain fog. You would think we would all want to protect our most valuable resource - our minds.

Posted by: covid callbacks | Sep 22, 2022 8:03:33 AM

We had a candidate last year request a virtual callback due to “health concerns.” We agreed but then learned that the person was doing multiple in-person callbacks at higher ranked schools in various states. So, we felt the person just wasn’t that interested in us. Thus, we’re likely to be more skeptical of such requests going forward.

Posted by: AnonProf | Sep 22, 2022 12:17:16 AM

I guess I have a different COVID perspective here but I do think it would behoove applicants to put themselves in the shoes of the hiring committee/faculty.

For every law school in the country right now, class is in session, and class is in person.

If you are unable to interview in person, isn't it reasonable to assume you would be unable to teach this semester in person?

Given that there are still far more qualified and capable applicants than there are positions, if you have the choice between two substantially equal candidates, one who can teach in person, and one who can't, wouldn't you choose the one who can fulfill all the duties of the position?

Posted by: Anon no tenure | Sep 21, 2022 10:53:25 PM

Re: expressing interest in a geographic location being a minus factor even for schools in that location---I think this is less about Secret Rules and more about the psychology of insecure people (a.k.a. most law professors). When you tell someone that you want to go to BeachSchoolUSA because you really love BeachTown, the insecure person thinks "they don't really think we're all that special, they just want to live by the beach." By contrast, when you say "you have such an enriching intellectual community!" or something like that but more convincing, you praise the people at the school. Which of those is likely to make people like you and want to hire you?

For particular oft-seen-as-undesirable-locations (rural, bad weather, etc.), I think that expressing interest in the geography if it's convincing can count as a plus on the margins for two reasons, both, again, insecurity related: (1) the faculty at the school in question will be uncertain if they can get you or if you'll get snatched away by BeachSchoolUSA, and it's bad to waste time chasing people they can't get. Convincing them otherwise helps. (2) Some faculty (and also/especially students and staff who are more likely to be *from there*) will have invested significant parts of their identity in those communities and will be very sensitive (insecurity, again) to the slightest sign of perceived disrespect for them (ask my early student evaluations how I know this!); convincing them you're into the location can mitigate that reaction.

As a whole, you can't really go wrong by asking yourself "how would a super insecure person react to how I present/what I'm considering saying?"

Posted by: AnonSeniorProf | Sep 21, 2022 10:39:51 PM

Do schools extend callback invites by subject area or all of the invites at the same time?

Posted by: Anon | Sep 21, 2022 10:13:25 PM

Given the amount of concern expressed by candidates about covid, it would seem that it would behoove schools to have some precautions in place, even if they cannot easily accommodate virtual call backs. It's not just the candidates that are trying to impress the schools. Schools should try to impress candidates by taking Covid seriously.

Some ideas that come to mind :
- encouraging faculty to wear masks during job talks so a candidate can feel comfortable giving their talk with or without their mask
- encouraging faculty to follow the lead of the candidate - i.e. masking in small meetings if the candidate is masked
- hosting meetings or meals outside as much as possible so masks aren't an issue and people can communicate freely

Also, I think there is a mistaken assumption that is being made on this thread that it is only people who are disabled, immunocompromised, or have young children or vulnerable family at home that care about this issue. It is also possible people have read the literature and understand that you can still get long Covid from a mild infection even if you are fully vaxxed and boosted. Given that long Covid can literally cause you to lose grey matter and we rely on the ability to use our brains, it's possible people are making reasonable risk assessments that they don't want to jeopardize their entire career by catching Covid at a callback.

Posted by: covid callbacks | Sep 21, 2022 9:19:32 PM

Re: COVID and callbacks

Our school isn’t scheduling virtual callbacks. Not sure what we would do if a candidate asked for one. Probably accommodate, but I’ll be honest. There are faculty members who will view that negatively. Remember your candidacy will come down to a full faculty vote…

Is that fair for candidates with disabilities or who are immunocompromised or who live with people who have special needs? No. But that’s the reality.

Scroll down some to read the heated discussion on COVID, masking, disability policies, etc.

Posted by: COVID | Sep 21, 2022 7:18:04 PM

Our school has scheduled multiple online callbacks and I don’t think it disadvantages candidates at all. But it might at other schools, even though it shouldn’t. Hard to say.

Posted by: anonprof | Sep 21, 2022 4:40:53 PM

I’m sure most schools will try and accommodate a request for a virtual callback, but (and this is unfair) I think it would seriously disadvantage that candidate.

Posted by: AnonProf | Sep 21, 2022 1:17:17 PM

For callbacks, are any schools offering an all-Zoom option or are they expected to all be on campus?
Some candidates still have COVID concerns. Is it okay to request all Zoom if you get a callback invite?

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 21, 2022 12:13:37 PM

Far #2 had 70ish

Posted by: Anon | Sep 21, 2022 11:38:11 AM

I noticed there was one offer out there… I know it’s reported later but perhaps it would be helpful to have an accepted/declined column. Or perhaps that person could give more info in the comments. Thanks!

Posted by: anon | Sep 21, 2022 11:23:04 AM

I've heard the first FAR batch had 272 applicants. The second batch was released today. Could someone "in the know" let us know how much that number increased with this second drop?

Posted by: Second FAR Drop | Sep 21, 2022 11:18:43 AM

Any word on Tennessee’s timeline?

Posted by: Anonymous | Sep 20, 2022 7:47:51 PM

re: @AnonProf - I'm glad the majority won out. I hope other committees are not looking at this negatively. The AALS specifically says the supplemental documents are "not required to submit your application" and that you can update them at any point. The only document it lists that some schools require is a DEI statement.

If schools require a job talk to be uploaded to AALS for an application to be considered for a screener, they should post this somewhere publicly or tell AALS to change their language so that job talks are also encouraged to be uploaded.

The advice I got to not worry about having the job talk ready to post at the beginning of August was from someone who has been advising candidates for a long time. I was also told by another law professor not to share your job talk until it is ready. The document Yale put out on "Entering the Teaching Market" has sample letters from candidates applying directly to schools that say that they can send a copy of their job talk upon request. So it didn't seem crazy to me not to upload it. Obviously, with screeners moving to late august and September, there isn't much of a window between submitting the FAR and screeners compared to the years of the meat market so it needs to be close to ready.

It would be great if schools stopped evaluating candidates based on unwritten rules that are not clear to the candidates, especially when we're all doing our best to be well informed and prepared.

Posted by: job talk | Sep 20, 2022 4:41:39 PM

I've never been at a school where a desire to be there has worked against someone, so I have no direct experience with it. I'm working mostly off a Twitter discussion from a year or two ago. It seems preposterous. But it's probably like how in some contexts being just a little too eager can work against someone.

Posted by: AppointmentsChair | Sep 20, 2022 4:31:22 PM

AppointmentsChair 2:59 pm, could you please elaborate, if possible, on which types of schools would disfavour students that express a desire in being there?

Posted by: Anon | Sep 20, 2022 3:02:15 PM

AppointmentsChair 2:59 pm, could you please elaborate, if possible, on which types of schools would disfavour students that express a desire in being there?

Posted by: Anon | Sep 20, 2022 3:02:14 PM

Re: callbacks and geographic preferences, it seems to depend. For a school that's in an out of the way place and not highly ranked they can be a legitimate plus factor. There are some schools, or so I've heard, where seeming to want to be there can actually work against a candidate. And for the schools that are generally regarded as desirable because of prestige or location I suspect candidates' preferences don't matter at all.

Posted by: AppointmentsChair | Sep 20, 2022 2:59:18 PM

Post a comment