Williams & Connolly v. Gibson (DC) Forum

[Anonymous User]

I’ve narrowed down my choices for next summer to W&C and GDC. I’m interested in lit/investigations and was curious on how people would differentiate the two firms on depth/breadth of work and culture.

Thanks!

[Anonymous User]

There is a perception that, relative to GDC, W&C subjects juniors to less grunt work and you get more sophisticated work earlier. Not sure how accurate this is. However, I don't think there's much dispute that people regard W&C as fancier and more prestigious, but perhaps that's not the best reason to choose one law firm over another.

[Anonymous User]

I don't think you can go wrong either way. I agree that W&C is a slightly fancier credential (particularly outside DC, whereas I think most people in DC would regard them as peer firms at the top of the market).

The blunt way I'd think about it is whether or not you want to be an appellate lawyer. GDC has one of the largest and best-regarded appellate and admin groups in the city, if you can get into it, whereas W&C is a trial firm, first and foremost, with a small but excellent appellate team. I'd also say that GDC is a better platform to do a stint in government--they have a healthy revolving door setup. While W&C has great placement into government litigation positions (DOJ/USAOs), once you leave the firm, you probably won't be able to come back. GDC also has a reputation as being a more conservative office than some other firms in DC, but I think that's mainly because of the appellate group.

But if you're not doing appeals, and if you think you want to do trial work or end up at a lit boutique down the line, I think W&C has an edge (particularly in white collar and investigations, as you highlight). While it sits somewhere between a defense-side boutique and a biglaw firm like GDC, you still get some of the benefits of being at a firm with lower leverage: generally smaller teams, more of a shot at getting early substantive experience, and a (slightly) more realistic path to partner.

Anyway, I do think there are strong arguments both ways. You should feel comfortable going with your gut on this one.

[Anonymous User]

This is all super helpful - thank you! Any idea on how accurate the “free market” at Gibson is? Cause if I really can work on the full range of stuff there I’d be tempted to take that, but if it’s not the case I’d be MUCH more hesitant.

[Anonymous User]

That’s something to push on in your second look interviews, I think. I know GDC is nominally free market, but I’m not sure if, when or how you have to settle into a practice group there (and so you’d have free market staffing within one or two groups).

W&C is closer to a pure free market than GDC, and might offer you a better opportunity to be a generalist for longer, if that’s what you’re looking for. I hear the only pressure to specialize in any meaningful way comes very late, as you would start thinking about your bid to make partner.

[existentialcrisis]

Won’t Gibson end up paying you a good bit more as a mid level/senior?

From what I understand of the lit market I’d probably still pick W&C, but just something to think about.

[Anonymous User]

W&C for lit for the bigger name (unless you want to get paid slightly more at GDC).

But OP, school and class rank?

[Anonymous User]

There is a perception that, relative to GDC, W&C subjects juniors to less grunt work and you get more sophisticated work earlier. Not sure how accurate this is. However, I don't think there's much dispute that people regard W&C as fancier and more prestigious, but perhaps that's not the best reason to choose one law firm over another.

I don't think people view W&C as fancier than GDC DC overall. It is clearly better for white collar defense and commercial trials, and clearly worse for appeals. Many DC folks view appeals as the fanciest subspecialty of law and favor it over trial work. W&C also pays below market and often loses out on the best post-clerkship candidates.

[Anonymous User]

There is a perception that, relative to GDC, W&C subjects juniors to less grunt work and you get more sophisticated work earlier. Not sure how accurate this is. However, I don't think there's much dispute that people regard W&C as fancier and more prestigious, but perhaps that's not the best reason to choose one law firm over another.

I don't think people view W&C as fancier than GDC DC overall. It is clearly better for white collar defense and commercial trials, and clearly worse for appeals. Many DC folks view appeals as the fanciest subspecialty of law and favor it over trial work. W&C also pays below market and often loses out on the best post-clerkship candidates.

That's the thing - lots of people do W&C 2L summer (which looks ever slightly fancier), then COA then Gibson/Jones Day/Kirkland (when they had PC at least)/insert other elite appellate group with the practice group guarantee. There's no guarantee you get Gibson appeals when you return after a normal summer.

[Anonymous User]

I know at least 2 people who were no offered from the Gibson class this summer if that makes a difference in your decision…

[Anonymous User]

I know at least 2 people who were no offered from the Gibson class this summer if that makes a difference in your decision…

In D.C.? I haven't heard of this. Why?

[Anonymous User]

That’s something to push on in your second look interviews, I think. I know GDC is nominally free market, but I’m not sure if, when or how you have to settle into a practice group there (and so you’d have free market staffing within one or two groups).

No formal practice groups beyond the larger department (corp, lit, RE, etc). The free market thing is fairly legit, although obviously you might get pigeonholed over time based on the skills you develop, etc. But as a junior, should be able to do a bunch of stuff if that's what OP really wants.

[Anonymous User]

I don't think you can go wrong either way. I agree that W&C is a slightly fancier credential (particularly outside DC, whereas I think most people in DC would regard them as peer firms at the top of the market).

The blunt way I'd think about it is whether or not you want to be an appellate lawyer. GDC has one of the largest and best-regarded appellate and admin groups in the city, if you can get into it, whereas W&C is a trial firm, first and foremost, with a small but excellent appellate team. I'd also say that GDC is a better platform to do a stint in government--they have a healthy revolving door setup. While W&C has great placement into government litigation positions (DOJ/USAOs), once you leave the firm, you probably won't be able to come back. GDC also has a reputation as being a more conservative office than some other firms in DC, but I think that's mainly because of the appellate group.

But if you're not doing appeals, and if you think you want to do trial work or end up at a lit boutique down the line, I think W&C has an edge (particularly in white collar and investigations, as you highlight). While it sits somewhere between a defense-side boutique and a biglaw firm like GDC, you still get some of the benefits of being at a firm with lower leverage: generally smaller teams, more of a shot at getting early substantive experience, and a (slightly) more realistic path to partner.

Anyway, I do think there are strong arguments both ways. You should feel comfortable going with your gut on this one.

I picked GDC over W&C coming off of clerkships, as someone who wanted to do appeals. This analysis seems pretty right to me--W&C is very prestigious but GDC seemed the better firm for me as someone who wanted to do appeals and wanted the ability to do government work and still have the opportunity to rejoin the firm afterwards. It was a very tough call for me at the time, but in retrospect it was the right one.

The free market system is real at GDC and you can be a generalist if that's what you want. I think it's right that lots of people over time specialize into particular areas, but many or most GDC associates don't specialize early in their career. If you want to slot into one practice group and stay there, that's fine, but you can also take your time to try different things and be thought of as an associate who does, say, an energy case here and there without being pigeonholed as an "energy associate." (By contrast, my understanding of W&C is that it is only free market after your initial assignment to three-ish matters when you join, and those matters can sometimes be long-running ones. At GDC, it's free market from the get-go.)

I also haven't heard anything about GDC summers not receiving offers.

The money is also better for midlevels on up, particularly when special bonuses are happening.

[Anonymous User]

I know at least 2 people who were no offered from the Gibson class this summer if that makes a difference in your decision…

In D.C.? I haven't heard of this. Why?

Also very interested.

[Curiouslsac7]

W&C for lit for the bigger name (unless you want to get paid slightly more at GDC).

But OP, school and class rank?

T6 ~10%

[Curiouslsac7]

I don't think you can go wrong either way. I agree that W&C is a slightly fancier credential (particularly outside DC, whereas I think most people in DC would regard them as peer firms at the top of the market).

The blunt way I'd think about it is whether or not you want to be an appellate lawyer. GDC has one of the largest and best-regarded appellate and admin groups in the city, if you can get into it, whereas W&C is a trial firm, first and foremost, with a small but excellent appellate team. I'd also say that GDC is a better platform to do a stint in government--they have a healthy revolving door setup. While W&C has great placement into government litigation positions (DOJ/USAOs), once you leave the firm, you probably won't be able to come back. GDC also has a reputation as being a more conservative office than some other firms in DC, but I think that's mainly because of the appellate group.

But if you're not doing appeals, and if you think you want to do trial work or end up at a lit boutique down the line, I think W&C has an edge (particularly in white collar and investigations, as you highlight). While it sits somewhere between a defense-side boutique and a biglaw firm like GDC, you still get some of the benefits of being at a firm with lower leverage: generally smaller teams, more of a shot at getting early substantive experience, and a (slightly) more realistic path to partner.

Anyway, I do think there are strong arguments both ways. You should feel comfortable going with your gut on this one.

I picked GDC over W&C coming off of clerkships, as someone who wanted to do appeals. This analysis seems pretty right to me--W&C is very prestigious but GDC seemed the better firm for me as someone who wanted to do appeals and wanted the ability to do government work and still have the opportunity to rejoin the firm afterwards. It was a very tough call for me at the time, but in retrospect it was the right one.

The free market system is real at GDC and you can be a generalist if that's what you want. I think it's right that lots of people over time specialize into particular areas, but many or most GDC associates don't specialize early in their career. If you want to slot into one practice group and stay there, that's fine, but you can also take your time to try different things and be thought of as an associate who does, say, an energy case here and there without being pigeonholed as an "energy associate." (By contrast, my understanding of W&C is that it is only free market after your initial assignment to three-ish matters when you join, and those matters can sometimes be long-running ones. At GDC, it's free market from the get-go.)

I also haven't heard anything about GDC summers not receiving offers.

The money is also better for midlevels on up, particularly when special bonuses are happening.

Id love to hear about the changing of free market at W&C after your first few assignments. How does the system work after that?

[Anonymous User]

First quoted OP here — as I understand it, you just get a few initial assignments handed to you when you join and then it’s totally free market after that.

[Anonymous User]

In my understanding, it's actually pretty common for GDC DC to no-offer at least one summer every year. Something about "standards" or whatever. (A guy who clerked for my COA judge the year before I did told me his co-clerk was one of the no-offers in their GDC DC class when they summered, FWIW.)

[Anonymous User]

First quoted OP here — as I understand it, you just get a few initial assignments handed to you when you join and then it’s totally free market after that.

Genuine curiosity--how do GDC associates get their first assignments?

The idea behind the W&C initial assignments is that to give associates a 100%ish caseload of usually 2/3 cases. (One 100% case is only supposed to happen if you're on a trial team right away.) You fill out a preference form before starting to check off the areas you're interested in, and they *try* to make one of your first assignments within those areas. Once your first case or cases slow down, you look for other assignments yourself, although there is a committee that will help staff you during your first year if you want that help. That way, if both of your initial cases get really slow but you haven't really gotten to know anyone or built a reputation yet, you aren't just totally stuck cold calling partners.

[jdoeman1234567]

In my understanding, it's actually pretty common for GDC DC to no-offer at least one summer every year. Something about "standards" or whatever. (A guy who clerked for my COA judge the year before I did told me his co-clerk was one of the no-offers in their GDC DC class when they summered, FWIW.)

This makes sense because Gibson is one of the only firms that actually enforces grade cut offs. I assume the firm makes exceptions, but I could see it no offering a person whose grades have dramatically dropped if that person was on the fringe when hired.

[Anonymous User]

First quoted OP here — as I understand it, you just get a few initial assignments handed to you when you join and then it’s totally free market after that.

Genuine curiosity--how do GDC associates get their first assignments?

I started at GDC after clerking and during the pandemic, and got my first assignments by emailing partners and senior associates at the firm that I wanted to work with. The ramp-up period was short--I was fully up to speed by the end of my second full month--and it has been smooth sailing from there.

As relevant to this thread, the summer program is not that way. Work is centrally assigned.

[Anonymous User]

In my understanding, it's actually pretty common for GDC DC to no-offer at least one summer every year. Something about "standards" or whatever. (A guy who clerked for my COA judge the year before I did told me his co-clerk was one of the no-offers in their GDC DC class when they summered, FWIW.)

At a different GDC office, never heard of such a thing. No offers are rare, but when they come they're of the sort that's warranted and everyone would reasonably agree with.

[RedNewJersey]

Personally, I would weigh highly that GDC will pay you materially more.

Apart from that, W&C is well-regarded for white collar, but I'm not sure it is considered better for straight litigation. I'd view them as roughly similar, though maybe you like GDC better if you want a larger firm with more offices and global reach, whereas you might prefer W&C if you want a smaller firm that is focused on DC (though of course they practice nationwide).

As for the free market, I think it's real, but that doesn't mean you can do anything you want, for the basic reason that partners will not offer *you* in particular the work you would prefer. This is a bit obvious, since there are better and worse assignments, and associates who do all of them (i.e., somehow, the doc review gets staffed, the lame memos get staffed, and the cool trial gets staffed). Ironically, that is what makes it very much like the free market (there are rocket scientists and janitors in a free market, and both had the opportunity to compete for the others' job; obviously the qualifications are different, etc., but the general principle of buyer and seller agreeing applies).

[Anonymous User]

I know at least 2 people who were no offered from the Gibson class this summer if that makes a difference in your decision…

In D.C.? I haven't heard of this. Why?

Also very interested.

I also know someone no offered at Gibson this summer and he had no negative work product feedback or anything bad happen at all. No drop in grades either. He was basically blindsided. Tread carefully friends.

[DougEvans789]

I’d do W&C.

If you want to stay, it’s prolly easier to make partner at W&C than GDC.

If you want to leave, the number of people you’ll encounter who see W&C as objectively superior to GDC will exceed the number of people you’ll encounter who see GDC as objectively superior to W&C.