GULC Part-Timers and OCI Forum

[Robespierre]

Does anyone have any particular advice for part-time students at Georgetown about bidding for on-campus interviews? Like which firms are receptive to, or unreceptive to, part-timers? Special strategies? Anything at all?

Any advice would be appreciated, but especially from part-timers themselves and ESPECIALLY part-timers who've been through the process.

[Anonymous User]

In my experience, it makes no difference to firms if you're FT or PT. PT can work in your favor, especially if your WE is interesting/relevant/prestigious/etc. (think biglaw, engineering, patent, accounting, consulting, DOJ, other government etc.). And I've never actually heard of it hurting anyone. If some firms ARE actually unreceptive, they definitely wouldn't say it outright - so there's no way to know. Regardless, I'd assume IF any bias exists, it should be minimal these days (especially since GULC is now required to disclose PT students' credentials to USNWR so there shouldn't be any significant difference in student "credentials").

Really, there is no special strategy for PTers...just bid according to your grades/preferences as anyone would do. Be careful if you're gunning for DC only, because that is how some people strike out. Obviously play up any relevant WE you have. If you didn't work for some extended period of time during school, that will look bad from what I hear. One person I know believes he under performed EIW because of this. If this is you, find a way to mitigate this - but I have no suggestions.

Source: I switched from PT to FT a few years ago when it was still allowed. All of my friends who stayed in PT, and wanted biglaw, crushed EIW. But, they did tend to have pretty legit WE - YMMV.

[Robespierre]

^Yah, that's the wisdom I've heard from others: firms will gladly consider part-timers as long as you fit their image of what a part-timer does, i.e., works at something sophisticated during the day and goes to school at night.

I heard Cleary Gottlieb has multiple lawyers who were GULC part-timers, but I can't verify that.

Good to hear from you that being PT generally won't HURT. That's my fear.

[Anonymous User]

comforting (for those of us who work full time while doing the PT program) to know that firms will actually know/care if you work considering that a ton of people go through at least 1E without a substantial full time job, or any job for that matter.

[Anonymous User]

comforting (for those of us who work full time while doing the PT program) to know that firms will actually know/care if you work considering that a ton of people go through at least 1E without a substantial full time job, or any job for that matter.

Not sure if it is still an option, firms don't really distinguish those who started in § 7 and then transferred to FT prior to EIW from those who started in the FT program. Thus, someone who had no job during 1E, transferred to FT and then did EIW would not be punished by firms. Honestly, I don't think that the firms can even tell that someone was a PT->FT transfer without a very close read of the transcript (which they won't do).

[Anonymous User]

First anon here.

"Honestly, I don't think that the firms can even tell that someone was a PT->FT transfer without a very close read of the transcript (which they won't do)."
- Yeah you're right - firms didn't really care if you switched to FT when I did EIW a few years ago. I did get asked once or twice about this though, but got callbacks at those firms. Now, switching isn't really an option as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong).


"comforting (for those of us who work full time while doing the PT program) to know that firms will actually know/care if you work considering that a ton of people go through at least 1E without a substantial full time job, or any job for that matter."
- Yeah, it isn't fair that some people don't work at all 1E, or even 2E year - but life isn't fair - you just gotta deal with it. Most find clever ways to work around their lack of employment, or make up for it with with stellar grades. It will certainly hurt some people at some firms though. Not as much as it probably should.

Good luck.

[Anonymous User]

comforting (for those of us who work full time while doing the PT program) to know that firms will actually know/care if you work considering that a ton of people go through at least 1E without a substantial full time job, or any job for that matter.

Not sure if it is still an option, firms don't really distinguish those who started in § 7 and then transferred to FT prior to EIW from those who started in the FT program. Thus, someone who had no job during 1E, transferred to FT and then did EIW would not be punished by firms. Honestly, I don't think that the firms can even tell that someone was a PT->FT transfer without a very close read of the transcript (which they won't do).

This is the first year that GULC will be cracking down on PT-FT transfers. I only know of 2 who are transfering to FT this fall after 1E.

[Robespierre]

Would any of you say that a part timer shouldn't bother bidding on really super-select firms like Cravath, SulCrom, etc.? Sounds from the discussion like the answer is, go ahead and give it a try.

[Anonymous User]

I mean, if your stats make you competitive, go for it. PT or FT should have minimal (or zero) bearing. If anything, PT shows you're already adept at slaving away.

Because you're asking, I'm assuming you are competitive. But in case you weren't sure, I think for these firms Top 10% at a minimum is required (and that's being generous I think). Make sure you're not throwing away useful bids.

[Princetonlaw68]

Do any of you guys in the PT program at Gtown know if PT students less often attend OCI than the FT students?

[Anonymous User]

I'm not sure if generalized answers are super helpful, because there's a lot of variation.

I think that if you have an attractive or prestigious daytime job, as lots of PT students do, then you'll likely do a fair bit better than a K-JD student with the same grades and I can't imagine any firm really disqualifying you for that reason. If you have a less attractive job or aren't working, then you probably get treated the same as anyone else. I've never heard of PT status being viewed as a penalty.

[gulcregret]

Can say with close to 100 percent certainty that PTers are not at any disadvantage. Went through the process myself and it's all good. PTers with no jobs will need higher grades and explain what they are doing with the extra time because most employers will ask, if they pick up on the PT thing. But as most said before, no one will really look that close at the resume. Biggest thing about EIW is first, grades, second, interview well and make a solid impression in the first 2 minutes or so. I have done EIW as an interviewer and it is exhausting.