Related Posts

Young, Soon-To-Be CPA (Or HR Spy) Wants To Know What Your Recruiting Events Are Like

Call me crazy but this feels more like an email from a curious recruiter researching the competition than a junior trying to find out what other firms are up to. But hey, that’s just paranoid ole me.

If you have a question for our crack team of snark distributors, feel free to get in touch.

Hi GC,

I’m a young, aspiring CPA entering my junior year of undergrad. As a new target age group of recruiting, I recently attended a leadership conference with one of the Big 4. Sadly, I only applied for one such event, only to meet other students my age attending multiple events held by different firms. In an effort to always compare firms, I was wondering if you could open this up for discussion. Who had the lamest activities? Who had the most people? Which company threw it together at the last minute and had no clue what they were doing?

Thanks so much,

Bi(g 4) curious

Just wondering, did you try to talk to any of these “students your age” about the multiple events they were heading to? What did they have to say?

Why do you care? If you are interested in a particular firm, have you tried searching their tag on this website to see who gets the most “hoo-rah!” staff on here telling other firms’ employees how much they suck? I’m not 100% sure what it is you’re trying to glean from hearing about the recruiting events that you didn’t sign up for but let me save you a whole bunch of research: all recruiting events are pretty much the same. A bunch of awkward people stand around telling bad stories, sometimes crappy snacks are served, every now and then there are cocktails and at the end of it, some people come out of it with a job. End. These events have been going on for thousands of years (well, OK, maybe only the last several decades) and they’ve all pretty much ended the same.

But hey, let’s just say you are for real and just curious how other events went down… have you considered senior year? You have plenty of time to figure out what everyone else is doing.

That said, if anyone has some great stories to share (I’m talking drunk recruiters, moron accounting students making fools of themselves, hot chicks getting hit on by sleazy managers… whatever you kids got), by all means, please let us know.

Drug Testing at Public Accounting Firms Redux

From the mailbag:

Hi Caleb, I have a question about accounting firms in the Mid-West and whether or not drug testing is done pre-employment or on a random basis. I have searched the internet as well as Going Concern and have come up with a 50/50 mix of yes and no. It’s a tough question to find an answer to, and I can’t exactly ask around if you know what I mean. Seems like an appropriate question for Going Concern right?

Thanks,

Worried Man

It is an appropriate question, my fretful friend. Unfortunately, it is one that doesn’t have a definitive answer. Back in my House of Klynveld days in New York I worked on-site at a large investment bank that perilously close an amazing ‘shroom burger. This particular client required a drug test for all on-site contractors. KPMG did not require a drug test and I do not recall if employees were subjected to random testing.

As the headline suggests, we’ve covered this topic before, around this time last year. To my knowledge, no other Big 4 firms require a drug test as a condition of employment but clients are on a case-by-case basis. My suspicion would be that the second tier (i.e. GT, BDO, McG) would not require a test for condition of employment but anything’s possible.

Regionals are probably more of a crapshoot. Generally, it seems rare that a service-oriented business would subject anyone to drug testing since there isn’t any heavy machinery or children (aside from man-babies) around. In fact, we’ve all been privy to those co-workers who seem to be capital market servant rockstars when they’re unusually FOCUSED. Similarly, those that choose to fire up AK-47 after a rough day rather than pop Adderrall in the loo aren’t causing any harm.

My opinion is this – drug testing isn’t necessary for anyone until it starts affecting other people. Of course the policies of these firms are seemingly fluid, so if you’ve been subjected to a test randomly or just to walk in the door, let us know in the comments.

Accounting News Roundup: SEC Delay on IFRS Irks Some; Client Opinions of Big 4 Audits Not So Hot in UK; IRS Asks for $21M to Answer More Phones | 02.25.10

• U.S. delay on global accounting leaves world waiting [Reuters]
The head of financial reporting at the ICAEW is not impressed with the SEC’s plan to string everyone along on IFRS. Although we’re sure Dr. Nigel Sleigh-Johnson is bright guy, we’re not sure what the good doctor was expecting from, you know, the SEC.

Dr. Johnson complains that ‘the world [has] been awaiting clear signals from the Securities and Exchange Commission as to how and when it is going to start the process of completing the convergence to International Financial Reporting Standards,’ which is probably true. Think about it. If 110 countries have jumped on the IFRS ship, they sure as hell would want the US of A on that ship too because that way, if this turns out to be the worst idea in the history of double-entry accounting, then at least the U.S. went along with it too.


• Big Four audits are off the pace [Accountancy Age]
As a group, the Big 4 didn’t fare to well in the inaugural “Accountancy Age Finance 360 survey of client opinions” which asked participants to give their “views on the service they received from their last audit provider”.

Out of twelve firms, PricewaterhouseCoopers ranked the highest at #5, KPMG #9, Deloitte #10, and Ernst & Young brought up the rear at #12. The Age reports that “[E&Y] Staff were described as ‘pretty dire’, short on technical knowledge, confidence and even decent written English. Negative comments outnumbered the positive two to one.” Comments on KPMG and Deloitte were a little better:

While KPMG won plaudits for technical skills, it was let down by perception of its added value, with one FD claiming “very little feedback on potential improvements” their money.

Deloitte also struggled to prove it added value, while clients felt the firm’s audits were “mechanical” and an exercise in “box-ticking”.

One FD felt Deloitte was “more concerned with gathering enough evidence to stand up in court with a defence if there were ever a negligence case”.

All the firms not happy with their ranking essentially said that they were “committed to the highest standards of work” or something like that. You know the drill.

The tops firms in the survey were all included two Global 6 candidates: Mazars at #1 and Grant Thornton at #3 with Horwath Clark Whitehill taking the silver.

• IRS Commissioner Requests Additional $21m So IRS Will Not Answer Taxpayer Phone Calls 25% of the Time [TaxProf Blog]
Doug Shulman asked the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government for $21 million to improve the customer service. Apparently this would result in a 4% jump in calls answered. That sounds like magical government math if we have ever heard it.