NU OCI 2013/The Great Jerb Hunt Forum

[bk1]

Based purely on GPA, seems like maybe consider Proskauer, Weil (maybe not a great idea after today's news?), Kaye Scholer and Dechert?

Meh. At least Weil isn't laying off first years.

Oh that's good, wonder if associates got laid off on performance, by practice area, or whether it was random. I guess an explicit layoff would be much easier to explain than a stealth layoff, so maybe they did those people a favor.

Trying to figure out if potential layoffs are even something we should be thinking about right now in the bidding process or whether we should only think about it if we get more than one offer.

You'd be hard pressed to find a firm that hasn't laid people off ITE. Whether Weil's recent doing so makes them worse than other firms I don't know (though I lean towards it not making them worse). At this point the name of the game is getting interviews and then offers.

[bk1]

Any advice for someone around median targeting CA & NY? What's the best way to maximize interviews?

here's what I have so far:
1. attend all the job fairs
2. mass mail mid july-ish
3. reach out to any possible connections / aka netwerk
4. bid smart @ oci (could use advice)

That's a good list. I'd be prepared to go hard on NYC. CA from median is not that easy.

[homestyle28]

Kirkland is well within reach. So are Winston and Jenner.

really? at least from the median GPA sheets the career office sent out, Kirkland, Winston and Jenner had ridiculous medians (>3.7). how is it possible that they're within reach? (not trying to argue, just wondering what you're basing your opinion on)

Have spoken with folks at multiple firms (incl. some listed here) and confirmed that you're in contention at those levels. I wouldn't even worry about the "required" GPA floors some list.

The thing to keep in mind on GPAs is that those are medians for Callbacks, not offers. There were as many folks below a 3.7 as above. There's only so many 1Ls with GPAs above 3.7, so while they get loads of CBs, they can only go on so many and can only accept one offer.

[Anonymous User]

Any advice for someone around median targeting CA & NY? What's the best way to maximize interviews?

here's what I have so far:
1. attend all the job fairs
2. mass mail mid july-ish
3. reach out to any possible connections / aka netwerk
4. bid smart @ oci (could use advice)

That's a good list. I'd be prepared to go hard on NYC. CA from median is not that easy.

any firms in CA known for being more chill about grades?

[bk1]

Any advice for someone around median targeting CA & NY? What's the best way to maximize interviews?

here's what I have so far:
1. attend all the job fairs
2. mass mail mid july-ish
3. reach out to any possible connections / aka netwerk
4. bid smart @ oci (could use advice)

That's a good list. I'd be prepared to go hard on NYC. CA from median is not that easy.

any firms in CA known for being more chill about grades?

SV is going to be the least grade conscious. LA will be easier than SF.

[cactuarX3]

Any advice for someone around median targeting CA & NY? What's the best way to maximize interviews?

here's what I have so far:
1. attend all the job fairs
2. mass mail mid july-ish
3. reach out to any possible connections / aka netwerk
4. bid smart @ oci (could use advice)

That's a good list. I'd be prepared to go hard on NYC. CA from median is not that easy.

any firms in CA known for being more chill about grades?

i have heard that Orrick is and possibly Fenwick

[terriers]

Can anyone comment on how grade-conscious Sidley-CHI is? Somebody commented a few pages back that they weren't worth a high bid without a 3.8 and/or LR (preferably both). Is that confirmed? I would have thought that if you were in the top third or top-25% it was worth a shot considering high class size and that their median has been in the very high 3.7s the past couple years (unless all or most the people getting CBs below that number have LR).

[homestyle28]

Can anyone comment on how grade-conscious Sidley-CHI is? Somebody commented a few pages back that they weren't worth a high bid without a 3.8 and/or LR (preferably both). Is that confirmed? I would have thought that if you were in the top third or top-25% it was worth a shot considering high class size and that their median has been in the very high 3.7s the past couple years (unless all or most the people getting CBs below that number have LR).

FWIW everyone I know at Sidley had high grades and/or LR. But, if you're close and think Sidley is the place for you, I don't think it's a wasted bid. But I wouldn't do it if I was below a 3.5 and thought I'd be equally happy at Kirkland.

[Anonymous User]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

[Icculus]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

All that really matters is the 3.4x

[IAFG]

Can anyone comment on how grade-conscious Sidley-CHI is? Somebody commented a few pages back that they weren't worth a high bid without a 3.8 and/or LR (preferably both). Is that confirmed? I would have thought that if you were in the top third or top-25% it was worth a shot considering high class size and that their median has been in the very high 3.7s the past couple years (unless all or most the people getting CBs below that number have LR).

FWIW everyone I know at Sidley had high grades and/or LR. But, if you're close and think Sidley is the place for you, I don't think it's a wasted bid. But I wouldn't do it if I was below a 3.5 and thought I'd be equally happy at Kirkland.

Because you have to bid Sidley so high, I don't agree that a 3.4X should waste the bid at OCI, no matter how they feel personally about Sidley. But that's assuming no personal connection or soft that would make that person a good fit.

[Anonymous User]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

All that really matters is the 3.4x

What about a more dramatic upswing? Say 3.3 Fall and then 4.0 Spring?

[Kikero]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

All that really matters is the 3.4x

What about a more dramatic upswing? Say 3.3 Fall and then 4.0 Spring?

I don't know how law firms do things, but just from a general perspective, a "trend" that consists of two samples doesn't seem likely to me to be weighted very heavily. Since we've only taken 10 classes so far, even a huge shift in performance could be attributed to just liking the classes one semester better than the other.

[homestyle28]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

All that really matters is the 3.4x

What about a more dramatic upswing? Say 3.3 Fall and then 4.0 Spring?

Obviously the more upswing the better. If nothing else you can work it into your answers. Someone's bound to ask you how you're liking law school. You can say: it was a tough adjustment, but like I usually do, I worked really hard to get better and the results speak for themselves.

[splitmuch]

Is the general consensus that gpa trends don't really matter when it comes to bidding?

3.3x fall, 3.5x spring, 3.4x overall

All that really matters is the 3.4x

What about a more dramatic upswing? Say 3.3 Fall and then 4.0 Spring?

Obviously the more upswing the better. If nothing else you can work it into your answers. Someone's bound to ask you how you're liking law school. You can say: it was a tough adjustment, but like I usually do, I worked really hard to get better and the results speak for themselves.

Yeah, its only going to help by using it as an interesting interview answer. If you do so, then be prepared to answer a follow-up about what specific adjustments you made and why.

[homestyle28]

Obviously the more upswing the better. If nothing else you can work it into your answers. Someone's bound to ask you how you're liking law school. You can say: it was a tough adjustment, but like I usually do, I worked really hard to get better and the results speak for themselves.

Yeah, its only going to help by using it as an interesting interview answer. If you do so, then be prepared to answer a follow-up about what specific adjustments you made and why.

I'm not sure that it's the ONLY way it's going to help. Some recruiters are smart enough/care enough to realize that being able to get your stuff together is a sign of the kind of worker you are. But you can't bid/act like you have a 4.0.

[splitmuch]

Obviously the more upswing the better. If nothing else you can work it into your answers. Someone's bound to ask you how you're liking law school. You can say: it was a tough adjustment, but like I usually do, I worked really hard to get better and the results speak for themselves.

Yeah, its only going to help by using it as an interesting interview answer. If you do so, then be prepared to answer a follow-up about what specific adjustments you made and why.

I'm not sure that it's the ONLY way it's going to help. Some recruiters are smart enough/care enough to realize that being able to get your stuff together is a sign of the kind of worker you are. But you can't bid/act like you have a 4.0.

I just disagree. First, especially with dealing between two data points, I'm not sure a smart recruiter would even draw any positive conclusion from an "upward trend." Do you really think someone who went 3.3/4.0 has shown they are a better worker than someone who went 3.65/3.65? It could be simple regression to the mean, or respective choices of elective class. Or perhaps the 3.5 showed that the person doesn't always work up to their potential, and needed to be scared by the 3.3, and the recruiter and firm value consistency.

Second, even if we were to assume "trends" have significant meaning, I don't think there is any evidence for the conclusion that recruiters would take it into account. The common consensus is that, except on the higher ends, you are either above the GPA cutoff or you aren't; I have never seen statistical or even anecdotal evidence from a recruiter that indicates they consider trends.

TL/DR -I don't think the conclusion is "you can't bid/act like you have a 4.0" but "you can't bid/act like you have anything higher than your actual GPA."

[crumpetsandtea]

Obviously the more upswing the better. If nothing else you can work it into your answers. Someone's bound to ask you how you're liking law school. You can say: it was a tough adjustment, but like I usually do, I worked really hard to get better and the results speak for themselves.

Yeah, its only going to help by using it as an interesting interview answer. If you do so, then be prepared to answer a follow-up about what specific adjustments you made and why.

I'm not sure that it's the ONLY way it's going to help. Some recruiters are smart enough/care enough to realize that being able to get your stuff together is a sign of the kind of worker you are. But you can't bid/act like you have a 4.0.

I just disagree. First, especially with dealing between two data points, I'm not sure a smart recruiter would even draw any positive conclusion from an "upward trend." Do you really think someone who went 3.3/4.0 has shown they are a better worker than someone who went 3.65/3.65? It could be simple regression to the mean, or respective choices of elective class. Or perhaps the 3.5 showed that the person doesn't always work up to their potential, and needed to be scared by the 3.3, and the recruiter and firm value consistency.

Second, even if we were to assume "trends" have significant meaning, I don't think there is any evidence for the conclusion that recruiters would take it into account. The common consensus is that, except on the higher ends, you are either above the GPA cutoff or you aren't; I have never seen statistical or even anecdotal evidence from a recruiter that indicates they consider trends.

TL/DR -I don't think the conclusion is "you can't bid/act like you have a 4.0" but "you can't bid/act like you have anything higher than your actual GPA."

I hate to speak on behalf of homestyle, but I think the TLDR is exactly what he meant in the first place.

[splitsplat]

what's the collective wisdom on journal participation?
I really really don't want to do journal and given my lackluster write-on effort, it would be a secondary journal if I end up doing one. I do plan to do other activities during the fall like trans moot court, miner and overall fairly involved in clubs and shit. How negative an impact do y'all think it would be to not have journal on?

[splitmuch]

what's the collective wisdom on journal participation?
I really really don't want to do journal and given my lackluster write-on effort, it would be a secondary journal if I end up doing one. I do plan to do other activities during the fall like trans moot court, miner and overall fairly involved in clubs and shit. How negative an impact do y'all think it would be to not have journal on?

It can cut a few ways. I know someone who did very well without it, but that person also is just awesome and I imagine interviews well. I would say if you are active in other things, your performance relative to your GPA most likely isnt going to be affected, but there is slight risk. Also if you are uncomfortable with your GPA, it might be better tp have it to fight a "laziness" perception. If you were smart enough to rank JLSP 2, then i would go ahead and do it because its not much work amyway. If you dont have an affinity for journal activities then do not do JCLC under any circumstance. Im not that familiar with the other journals workloads.

[Georgia Avenue]

do not do JCLC under any circumstance

could just shorten it to this

[Flips88]

Jumping in to be any help that I can.

Journal is dumb and I hate whoever first attached importance to it in the legal hiring world. But the fact is people still care for some reason. I think if you don't do a journal, you should have some fallback extra curricular that you are committed to whether it's trial team, a clinic, volunteering a lot, etc. They want to see that you're active.

[basilseal]

do not do JCLC under any circumstance

could just shorten it to this

Actually would you mind elaborating?

[crumpetsandtea]

do not do JCLC under any circumstance

could just shorten it to this

Actually would you mind elaborating?

Rising 2L here so grain of salt and etc etc, but apparently JCLC is the journal that assigns the most ridiculous amounts of work, but it's generally considered to be about as prestigious as any other secondary. So unless you really care about what you're writing about/you are a gunner, it's not really worth it and you should rank it lower.

[lgleye]

.