Williams & Connolly

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:24 am

FascinatedWanderer wrote:Wilkinson Walsh also pays way above market (more than Susman even this year) and I'm not under the impression they do much plaintiff's work.

I also disagree with the poster above who says W&C is the most selective firm in DC. The MTO DC office will be much more selective, and Kellogg Hansen is definitely pickier for post clerkship hiring.


To be fair I said most selective "big firm" in DC. MTO DC does not really exist yet, and Kellogg-no-longer-Huber is not a big firm.

User avatar
Mr. Blackacre
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:48 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Mr. Blackacre » Mon Apr 10, 2017 11:56 am

What I get from this thread: I am glad I'm not the only person who thought my rejection letter from W&C looked really nice.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 10, 2017 12:17 pm

Anonymous User wrote:this one is kind of tough tho b/c at KVN and MTO at least, wouldn't you say *some* associates make below market years 5-7 (and at least as of last year, a handful will make above). If you value-in the substantially higher chance of making partner at year 8-9 at these lower leverage firms, it would still seem to be a stronger compensation proposition than firms on the strict cravath scale (even though nominal PPP will be lower).

This is certainly one of the arguments for accepting less compensation in the short term. Of course, the calculation will depend on how greatly the chances are increased and that depends on the particular firm.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 4708
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 10, 2017 12:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:Off-topic a bit, but figured I'd ask. Anyone know if they adjusted salaries in response to the 2016 cravath bump? Can't find any info online, and uncomfortable to ask former classmates.

--interested clerk

W&C raised their salaries a few months before the Cravath bump; as far as I know, W&C didn't re-raise after the market adjusted upward.

FYI, if you value top-of-the-market compensation, W&C is not the firm for you. Mid-level associates (and especially senior associates) make below market. It's been that way for a long time.


Yea, from the outside-looking-in, the bump to 200k was in response to the bonus increases (which made their comp much lower for mids). Now that it's back to much lower (after salary bump), relatively speaking, wondered if they responded to the salary bump like they did the bonus bump.

I don't value top-of-the-market, but I do value being at the market. Don't need Kellogg, but Gibson/Cov/Wilmer-level comp would be nice.

For what it's worth, KVN and MTO have also paid a bit below market for mid-level and senior associates, historically. If you go to a defense-oriented lit firm with low leverage, you're unlikely to see market or above. The low-leverage lit boutiques that pay well (e.g., McKool, Susman) do a ton of plaintiff-side work.


this one is kind of tough tho b/c at KVN and MTO at least, wouldn't you say *some* associates make below market years 5-7 (and at least as of last year, a handful will make above). If you value-in the substantially higher chance of making partner at year 8-9 at these lower leverage firms, it would still seem to be a stronger compensation proposition than firms on the strict cravath scale (even though nominal PPP will be lower).

Both KVN and MTO have years where they match market or go above for certain associates. Historically, though, they both pay slightly below market for late mid-levels and seniors.

By the way, I was not suggesting that small differences in associate compensation should be a dispositive factor for anyone. Even setting aside improved partnership prospects, firms like W&C/MTO/KVN offer better training and opportunities for associates. I think it's foolish to turn that down for the sake of an extra $10K-$15K/yr.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 4708
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 10, 2017 12:47 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
FascinatedWanderer wrote:Wilkinson Walsh also pays way above market (more than Susman even this year) and I'm not under the impression they do much plaintiff's work.

I also disagree with the poster above who says W&C is the most selective firm in DC. The MTO DC office will be much more selective, and Kellogg Hansen is definitely pickier for post clerkship hiring.


To be fair I said most selective "big firm" in DC. MTO DC does not really exist yet, and Kellogg-no-longer-Huber is not a big firm.

Also, given that the thread started with a question posted by a 1L, I think it's reasonable to limit the universe to "offices that have SA programs." I mean, there are small appellate boutiques in DC where you have to be a SCOTUS clerk to work there. Even Kellogg isn't "selective" in those circles.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 10, 2017 12:52 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
FascinatedWanderer wrote:Wilkinson Walsh also pays way above market (more than Susman even this year) and I'm not under the impression they do much plaintiff's work.

I also disagree with the poster above who says W&C is the most selective firm in DC. The MTO DC office will be much more selective, and Kellogg Hansen is definitely pickier for post clerkship hiring.


To be fair I said most selective "big firm" in DC. MTO DC does not really exist yet, and Kellogg-no-longer-Huber is not a big firm.

Also, given that the thread started with a question posted by a 1L, I think it's reasonable to limit the universe to "offices that have SA programs." I mean, there are small appellate boutiques in DC where you have to be a SCOTUS clerk to work there. Even Kellogg isn't "selective" in those circles.


yeah; for example Munger DC has been interviewing/hiring, but basically only SCOTUS clerks/bristows have received offers. people who SA'd in LA have been rebuffed in trying to start/switch to DC.

lawlorbust
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 11:50 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby lawlorbust » Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:25 pm

^^ just lol at those dudes thinking switching to DC was a realistic possibility.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 10, 2017 1:55 pm

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:Off-topic a bit, but figured I'd ask. Anyone know if they adjusted salaries in response to the 2016 cravath bump? Can't find any info online, and uncomfortable to ask former classmates.

--interested clerk

W&C raised their salaries a few months before the Cravath bump; as far as I know, W&C didn't re-raise after the market adjusted upward.

FYI, if you value top-of-the-market compensation, W&C is not the firm for you. Mid-level associates (and especially senior associates) make below market. It's been that way for a long time.


Yea, from the outside-looking-in, the bump to 200k was in response to the bonus increases (which made their comp much lower for mids). Now that it's back to much lower (after salary bump), relatively speaking, wondered if they responded to the salary bump like they did the bonus bump.

I don't value top-of-the-market, but I do value being at the market. Don't need Kellogg, but Gibson/Cov/Wilmer-level comp would be nice.

For what it's worth, KVN and MTO have also paid a bit below market for mid-level and senior associates, historically. If you go to a defense-oriented lit firm with low leverage, you're unlikely to see market or above. The low-leverage lit boutiques that pay well (e.g., McKool, Susman) do a ton of plaintiff-side work.


this one is kind of tough tho b/c at KVN and MTO at least, wouldn't you say *some* associates make below market years 5-7 (and at least as of last year, a handful will make above). If you value-in the substantially higher chance of making partner at year 8-9 at these lower leverage firms, it would still seem to be a stronger compensation proposition than firms on the strict cravath scale (even though nominal PPP will be lower).

Both KVN and MTO have years where they match market or go above for certain associates. Historically, though, they both pay slightly below market for late mid-levels and seniors.

By the way, I was not suggesting that small differences in associate compensation should be a dispositive factor for anyone. Even setting aside improved partnership prospects, firms like W&C/MTO/KVN offer better training and opportunities for associates. I think it's foolish to turn that down for the sake of an extra $10K-$15K/yr.

Agree with all this (including the opportunities part) except for the reference to training--at least in the typical sense of that word. These aren't places where you are trained in the typical sense. You learn by doing. If you can't do, then you don't stay.

User avatar
Lacepiece23
Posts: 934
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:10 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Lacepiece23 » Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
howmanylits wrote:Off-topic a bit, but figured I'd ask. Anyone know if they adjusted salaries in response to the 2016 cravath bump? Can't find any info online, and uncomfortable to ask former classmates.

--interested clerk

W&C raised their salaries a few months before the Cravath bump; as far as I know, W&C didn't re-raise after the market adjusted upward.

FYI, if you value top-of-the-market compensation, W&C is not the firm for you. Mid-level associates (and especially senior associates) make below market. It's been that way for a long time.


Yea, from the outside-looking-in, the bump to 200k was in response to the bonus increases (which made their comp much lower for mids). Now that it's back to much lower (after salary bump), relatively speaking, wondered if they responded to the salary bump like they did the bonus bump.

I don't value top-of-the-market, but I do value being at the market. Don't need Kellogg, but Gibson/Cov/Wilmer-level comp would be nice.

For what it's worth, KVN and MTO have also paid a bit below market for mid-level and senior associates, historically. If you go to a defense-oriented lit firm with low leverage, you're unlikely to see market or above. The low-leverage lit boutiques that pay well (e.g., McKool, Susman) do a ton of plaintiff-side work.


this one is kind of tough tho b/c at KVN and MTO at least, wouldn't you say *some* associates make below market years 5-7 (and at least as of last year, a handful will make above). If you value-in the substantially higher chance of making partner at year 8-9 at these lower leverage firms, it would still seem to be a stronger compensation proposition than firms on the strict cravath scale (even though nominal PPP will be lower).

Both KVN and MTO have years where they match market or go above for certain associates. Historically, though, they both pay slightly below market for late mid-levels and seniors.

By the way, I was not suggesting that small differences in associate compensation should be a dispositive factor for anyone. Even setting aside improved partnership prospects, firms like W&C/MTO/KVN offer better training and opportunities for associates. I think it's foolish to turn that down for the sake of an extra $10K-$15K/yr.

Agree with all this (including the opportunities part) except for the reference to training--at least in the typical sense of that word. These aren't places where you are trained in the typical sense. You learn by doing. If you can't do, then you don't stay.


I think that is training. No one at any law firm really tells you what to do. The difference might be, and I don't know since I've never worked at one of those shops, that you get more substantive experience early on, which is very good training. Especially if someone is supervising your work.

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 4708
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby rpupkin » Mon Apr 10, 2017 2:40 pm

Lacepiece23 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
rpupkin wrote:By the way, I was not suggesting that small differences in associate compensation should be a dispositive factor for anyone. Even setting aside improved partnership prospects, firms like W&C/MTO/KVN offer better training and opportunities for associates. I think it's foolish to turn that down for the sake of an extra $10K-$15K/yr.

Agree with all this (including the opportunities part) except for the reference to training--at least in the typical sense of that word. These aren't places where you are trained in the typical sense. You learn by doing. If you can't do, then you don't stay.


I think that is training. No one at any law firm really tells you what to do. The difference might be, and I don't know since I've never worked at one of those shops, that you get more substantive experience early on, which is very good training. Especially if someone is supervising your work.

Exactly. Generally, when someone says that you get good "training" at a law firm, they don't mean that the law firm has good classes or seminars; they mean that the firm supports their associates getting early substantive experience.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Apr 17, 2017 12:50 pm

Some additional points from a mixture of people I know at the firm, personal experience, and research you could do from the outside looking in:

Grades matter but fit matters more. In reality this means that grades are practically necessary but not sufficient. There are more than enough applicants from the best schools to be selective on more than just grades, which is why people with 4.0+ get rejected. Those who don't have the grades probably won't get an interview unless they blow away an on campus interviewer or have an inside connection at the firm.

School preference is not in the order of the T14/15. Some schools have a much stronger pull at W&C, particularly local and southern schools. UVA, Duke, Georgetown, GW, and Texas send far more than Columbia, NYU, Michigan, Cornell, Northwestern, etc. It was rare to have an NYU summer but in most years there were a few Texas summers, 1-2 GW, many UVA/Duke/Georgetown.

When you interview, if you get one, emphasize love of litigation. Be humble about accomplishments and able to speak to out of office interests while demonstrating substantive intellectual curiosity about the law. The dream interview subject will not brag about grades or law review, will have insightful answers or observations about interesting cases from clerking, and why those legal issues were challenging, and should have some hobbies to discuss. The firm is very competitive to the outside world but wants collegiality in house, so people who have that kind of attitude (or learn it from military service or sports) are preferable.

Salary discrepancies are significant compared to the Cravath scale. Associates earn 25-30,000 less as third years, second year at the firm if coming off clerking, 50,000 less as fourth years, 70,000 less as fifth years, and the gulf increases for seniors, around 80-100,000 less each year as a senior. It's not just 10-15,000 a year and is significant both in absolute and percentage terms, so may not be the right place if you want to make the most money in your first 5-6 years of private practice.

User avatar
KissMyAxe
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:01 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby KissMyAxe » Mon Apr 17, 2017 2:10 pm

Monochromatic Oeuvre wrote:Hey TLS:

I'm a junior varsity wide receiver. I recently talked to a WR who did a scholarship at Alabama, and the school sounds like exactly where I want to be. I know I want to run zone blocks, and he said that's all they do. Plus I am from Birmingham.

I don't know much about colleges at all. I know Ohio State is hard to get a scholarship at, but other than that I'm lost. What do people hear about Alabama? Also, what do I need to do to get a scholarship?

Thank you!


QFP

Though perhaps they wouldn't get their asses kicked in the natty if they didn't only run zone blocks.

Moneytrees
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Moneytrees » Tue Apr 18, 2017 3:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:Some additional points from a mixture of people I know at the firm, personal experience, and research you could do from the outside looking in:

Grades matter but fit matters more. In reality this means that grades are practically necessary but not sufficient. There are more than enough applicants from the best schools to be selective on more than just grades, which is why people with 4.0+ get rejected. Those who don't have the grades probably won't get an interview unless they blow away an on campus interviewer or have an inside connection at the firm.

School preference is not in the order of the T14/15. Some schools have a much stronger pull at W&C, particularly local and southern schools. UVA, Duke, Georgetown, GW, and Texas send far more than Columbia, NYU, Michigan, Cornell, Northwestern, etc. It was rare to have an NYU summer but in most years there were a few Texas summers, 1-2 GW, many UVA/Duke/Georgetown.

When you interview, if you get one, emphasize love of litigation. Be humble about accomplishments and able to speak to out of office interests while demonstrating substantive intellectual curiosity about the law. The dream interview subject will not brag about grades or law review, will have insightful answers or observations about interesting cases from clerking, and why those legal issues were challenging, and should have some hobbies to discuss. The firm is very competitive to the outside world but wants collegiality in house, so people who have that kind of attitude (or learn it from military service or sports) are preferable.

Salary discrepancies are significant compared to the Cravath scale. Associates earn 25-30,000 less as third years, second year at the firm if coming off clerking, 50,000 less as fourth years, 70,000 less as fifth years, and the gulf increases for seniors, around 80-100,000 less each year as a senior. It's not just 10-15,000 a year and is significant both in absolute and percentage terms, so may not be the right place if you want to make the most money in your first 5-6 years of private practice.


Hard to believe UT students are more competitive for W&C than NYU or Columbia students.

User avatar
Mr. Blackacre
Posts: 205
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2015 11:48 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Mr. Blackacre » Tue Apr 18, 2017 10:39 am

Moneytrees wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Bla


Hard to believe UT students are more competitive for W&C than NYU or Columbia students.


I can't tell you about UT specifically, but for instance GULC sends out a couple of people to W&C every year despite the summer class not being that big, which I assume is because of the firm's history / number of older partners from Georgetown. W&C isn't Wachtell; they don't care as much about prestige as they do about ability, so I wouldn't be surprised if they also took a couple of really good UT students every year...

Also, Columbia grads usually want to stay in the city. And NYU sucks. :mrgreen:

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Apr 18, 2017 10:45 am

W&C sometimes has a hard time getting the New York kids they want to actually accept the offer. They also put a lot of weight on whether they think the student(s) will return to NYC post-clerking/graduating into their summer hiring. It's not for lack of want.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:00 am

Anonymous User wrote:W&C sometimes has a hard time getting the New York kids they want to actually accept the offer. They also put a lot of weight on whether they think the student(s) will return to NYC post-clerking/graduating into their summer hiring. It's not for lack of want.

Yep, a lot of New Yorkers seem to be completely incapable of even thinking about moving out of New York. I know a couple of NYC kids at CLS who turned down callbacks with W&C after they got V5 lit offers. I thought they were absolutely insane but to each his own.

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:13 pm

Not OP but related question:

Anyone know what 3L OCI is like for W&C? Does it even exist? I was turned down after a call-back for SA there, but have done decent 2L (fed clerkship, slight GPA boost). Chances they'd give me a second look?

User avatar
rpupkin
Posts: 4708
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby rpupkin » Tue Apr 18, 2017 8:22 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Not OP but related question:

Anyone know what 3L OCI is like for W&C? Does it even exist? I was turned down after a call-back for SA there, but have done decent 2L (fed clerkship, slight GPA boost). Chances they'd give me a second look?

If by "fed clerkship" you mean that you got a fed clerkship in a future year, then W&C will potentially consider your application while you're clerking.

User avatar
quiver
Posts: 939
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:46 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby quiver » Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:42 am

rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Not OP but related question:

Anyone know what 3L OCI is like for W&C? Does it even exist? I was turned down after a call-back for SA there, but have done decent 2L (fed clerkship, slight GPA boost). Chances they'd give me a second look?

If by "fed clerkship" you mean that you got a fed clerkship in a future year, then W&C will potentially consider your application while you're clerking.
Yeah, this. If your fed clerkship is 1+ years after graduation and your question is whether W&C would consider you for post-law-school-pre-clerkship employment, the answer is maybe. 3L OCI is a crapshoot generally and, at W&C, will largely depend on how much of their summer class is clerking, the needs of the firm, etc. I know for a fact that they have at least interviewed 3Ls (who did not have a clerkship lined up).

Anonymous User
Posts: 284029
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Apr 19, 2017 12:14 pm

quiver wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Not OP but related question:

Anyone know what 3L OCI is like for W&C? Does it even exist? I was turned down after a call-back for SA there, but have done decent 2L (fed clerkship, slight GPA boost). Chances they'd give me a second look?

If by "fed clerkship" you mean that you got a fed clerkship in a future year, then W&C will potentially consider your application while you're clerking.
Yeah, this. If your fed clerkship is 1+ years after graduation and your question is whether W&C would consider you for post-law-school-pre-clerkship employment, the answer is maybe. 3L OCI is a crapshoot generally and, at W&C, will largely depend on how much of their summer class is clerking, the needs of the firm, etc. I know for a fact that they have at least interviewed 3Ls (who did not have a clerkship lined up).


Seems unlikely that they would take a gap year person that wasn't a summer. They would certainly consider you as a clerk, but firms are still wary about taking on new associate that is about to leave(although of course they do that for their summers.) I work at a premier litigation shop in the vein of W&C and we actively recruit clerks, many with prior lit experience, but would be extremely wary of a new hire that had a clerkship on the books for the following year. I know we have told people in that position that we'd love to see their app as a clerk, ect. (Major exceptions are people coming off clerkships with SCOTUS booked in the coming years, where we've taken non-summers for the gap.)

ballouttacontrol
Posts: 675
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:00 pm

Re: Williams & Connolly

Postby ballouttacontrol » Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:14 pm

why would anyone work there?? smfh bust your ass hard af for below-market comp

Image




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.