GDC ranks its associates as follows: "3" means that you are fired with 3 months notice, "2" means that there are problems and you are getting a mid-year review, "1" means satisfactory or better. The vast majority of attorneys get a "1". Up to the 5th year, there is no formal ranking of associates within the 1-category, but the review says whether you had a "good" year, a "very good" year or an "excellent" year. If you are in your 4th or 5th year and don't get an "excellent" or at least a "very good", it's definitely time to look for a new job if you have any ambitions - lateral opportunities get worse as you get more senior and there is no long-term perspective for you at GDC. In the 6th year, category 1 is divided into 1a, 1b and 1c. Very few get 1a, a lot get 1b and some get 1c. In the 7th year, as long as you are in cat. 1, sub-committee 2 of the compensation committee (which is responsible for 7th years) may decide to put you up for partner next year (which happens to very few associates). If that happens, the partnership selection committee will decide whether you will be made partner after your 8th year. Otherwise you are "parked" in sub-committee 1 (which happens to the vast majority) which reviews the "super-senior" associates and can theoretically put you up for partner too. It is very difficult to come back from sub-committee 1, but the firm may keep you around for a few more years.

1)Lol

2) this is ripped straight from the comments of an ATL article on GDC bonuses

I wrote that comment.

Thanks for bringing it here(if that was you), still incredibly random.

Not going to GDC, but I still like to see how these things work!

So I herd from my bro bro that he knows a bro who got no offered for a .1 GPA dip. Elaborate.

How do you like GDC?

your bro bro is full of shit

I really don't see why GDC gets so much respect at my T14. It seems like they parse SAs and associates in a million different ways.

Solid economics, low leverage, well regarded litigation practice.

Leverage is getting worse every year. They were extremely conservative financially a few years ago. No longer. And I've got some pretty solid dirt on their litigation group, but can't say here.

Still a great firm, just becoming more and more like an NYC megafirm by the day.

Can you be more specific, as someone going to GDC this summer, I'd like to find out as much as I can about the firm.

Can't, but relax. It's just that GDC isn't shooting rainbows out of its ass like people think it does. You'll be fine.

Well as someone who has worked a real job before, anyone who thinks the firms aren't looking out for numero uno and the bottom line, first and foremost is an idiot or naive.

Thanks for the honesty at least.

Hate to hijack the GDC take-down, but how do you find out about financial leverage or which firms are particularly conservative financially?

The only kind of leverage I really know about is partner:associate ratios.

(Just want to figure out some stuff about my firm before my SA since I've heard they're pretty conservative, but I dunno, and I don't really trust my sources to know, so if I knew where to look or what to look at, it would probably be better... also feel pretty dumb for not trying to do all of this pre-OCI).

This is the question. After Dewey lied on its financials by counting income twice using a 14 month period I have no idea what numbers to believe. The only thing I can think of is to ask about it directly at the firm where you are working, but that seems like career suicide. I'm not even sure that junior partners know what is going on at some firms.

I've been reading some stuff on Adam Smith Esq that someone linked to in another thread to understand more about law firm financials.

Anyone know anything about Corporate work at GDC? Seems like they're growing their NYC corp practice, but have no idea really.

Bump, for an answer, plz.

Chambers rankings are pretty accurate. GDC is not really known for it's corp work. It's definitely a step or two below their litigation work.

Band 2 nationwide Corporate/M&A
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/USA/ ... 2#org_3688

One of 7 finalists for Chambers award for excellence-Corporate
http://www.chambersandpartners.com/pdfs ... list12.pdf


So, I guess not up to the litigation dept, but still pretty good

"Corporate/M&A" is only part of the picture, especially for a New York practice. It's a headline maker to be sure, but it's only a piece of the picture for major corporate practices.

Nationwide GDC is band 3 for capital markets/debt and equity, band 4 for banking/finance, band 3 for tax (which is actually a big deal in major transactions, particularly for M&A where it can be a driving force), band 3 for private equity, band 4 for banking regulation, and band 3 for fund formation. It appears they don't do derivatives, structured products, or bankruptcy/restructuring to any significant extent nationally at all.

Comparing GDC to the big name corporate players in NYC, you'll see that it holds its weight in M&A but is otherwise only solid in the other categories. And those other categories are a big deal - Cravath is a big deal in the M&A world, but it's still doing a shit ton of capital markets, banking/finance, etc. work and that's what makes its corporate practice so large and so sterling.

Concrete example: At one top NYC firm I am familiar with, M&A lawyers make up a large chunk of the firm but are a minority (probably only 20-30% or so) of the firm's "corporate" attorneys.

Don't get me wrong - all of the Vault ranked big firms are good at what they do, profitable, etc. Bands 2, 3 and 4 of the chambers rankings are filled with good firms that are filled with talented and rich lawyers. But Gibson's corporate practice isn't on the same level as the name-brand V10/V15 NYC firms.

All true. GDC's litigation practices stack up well against any of the name-brand V10/V15 NYC firms, however.