<p>Cellar, it is unfortunate that a graduate of MIT is unable to understand some pretty simple statistics. And this recession is meaningfully different from previous ones with respect to the practice of law because corporations were not outsourcing routine legal work off-shore 20 years ago. Large companies now house their contracts groups- or their employment law groups-- or their immigration teams-- in low cost locations overseas. One US based Associate General Counsel who works in Chicago or SF or Cleveland can manage 10 attorneys/barristers (depending on the country) who do the work that 10 US based lawyers used to do.</p>
<p>I’m thrilled that you’ve had success as a lawyer to date. I would think long and hard about advising someone to assume that they can graduate from U Conn in the middle of their class and find a legal job with a firm in Hartford or Greenwich or New London that allows them to pay off their loans and advance professionally.</p>
Cellar, I’m sorry, but you’re just wrong. I recently did a presentation on legal outsourcing. In that area alone, things are different than in previous recessions. You’ve been in the field almost three years, some of us have been for decades. </p>
<p>We aren’t recruiting in the same way that we were before or in the same numbers. Layoffs were once unthinkable, and being tapped on the shoulder after being elevated to the partnership never happened before. It does now. It’s a totally different model of practice, driven by clients’ needs and demands. Many, many corporations don’t want to pay for first year associates at all, and simply don’t.</p>
<p>You’re right about clerks being hired. They are still courted, paid large bonuses and given special consideration after joining firms. One thing I’ve noticed anecdotally is that even among non-clerks, there seems to be a preference for lawyers who did something else before, like PhDs, accountants, whatever. There is a move toward older associates, who bring something other than a diploma to the firm.</p>
<p>Another thing, too, is the advent of ediscovery in the litigation area. This has really opened up opportunities for firms to use temps to do things like coding and flagging, which used to be done by associates who would stay in warehouses for months at a time. Printing can now be done electronically, as well, so corporate or transactional associates don’t need to spend nights at the printer in anticipation of closing a deal. There are many jobs here for practice support analysts and assistants, which is pretty good money, but it’s a very tech-heavy, non-lawyer position.</p>
<p>I am heavily involved in legal placement. This is utterly different from past recessions as far as the top of the field is concerned. There’s been a revolution.</p>
<p>In living memory, YLS and HLS have not had to compete with other schools for firm jobs in any meaningful sense. They held OCI when it suited them, months after other schools were done, and expected the firms to hold spaces for their candidates – - and decade after decade, the firms obeyed. Until 2009. This recession caused Harvard Law School to <em>rewrite its academic calendar.</em> That was not even a subject of discussion during any previous recession. When you see an 800-pound gorilla get up and tap dance, you know you are seeing an unprecedented crisis.</p>
<p>One of these days, someone’s going to get hit with a big malpractice judgment for this sort of thing, or get disciplined for facilitating the practice of law without a license. Not that most junior associates at big U.S. law firms necessarily have any idea what they’re doing (and I’ve met a lot of them in the last 30 years), but the sheer incompetence of some of the foreign lawyers trying to comply with U.S. state and federal law – or even to code and flag documents for relevance and privilege issues – is breathtaking.</p>
<p>PS: Zoosermom, I agree with most of what you say, and perhaps your firm is different, but there was never a time in the last several decades at most big New York firms when layoffs were unheard of. There have been waves of them, some of them massive. Including firms getting rid of unproductive partners. Admittedly, what happened a few years ago was the worst, and I don’t think hiring will ever go back to what it once was.</p>
<p>DonnaL, perhaps I phrased it wrong. In prior recessions, no one would come out and admit there were layoffs, it was always a huge secret and chalked up to something else. In this recession, it’s been right there in the open which is something I’ve never seen before.</p>
<p>You must be kidding! The entire OLP business is a fraction of 1% of the $180 billion legal industry. Its impact is negligible and will remain so for a very long time. Most legal work of any significance simply can’t be outsourced. The ABA already restricts what type of legal work can be outsourced and furthermore a law firm in the US can’t outsource its liability. There have already been horror stories of e-discovery processes where masses of privileged documents were handed over to opposing counsel by the OLP company. Most outsourcing groups carry only very minimal liability. As far as contracts, you are better off downloading a template from the web than have somebody offshore handle it for you. The problem is not the drafting which takes no time, it is the counseling and negotiation. That’s what my clients pay me for. No risk of outsourcing there!</p>
<p>Even in my field, I was told armies of Indian engineers and lawyers would soon write patents for US companies and take away the jobs of US attorneys. That never happened and the demand for patent attorneys is stronger than ever. It is actually the reverse: far more Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Indian companies seek to file patents in the US than the reverse. For that they need US attorneys. Foreign attorneys can’t get registered and file with the USPTO.</p>
<p>I don’t disagree the environment is tough, especially for starting lawyers. At the same time it is also a period of great opportunity for those who can seize it. Most small and medium specialized law firms I know are doing better than ever, in part because their lower overhead allows them to compete with the bigger firms. They can offer the services of a senior attorney at a big firm for the fraction of the cost. Some dinosaur firms who had nothing to offer but size will disappear but those left standing will be that much stronger.</p>
<p>Actually, I think UConn law grads are not doing too bad considering the overall market. They have very low debt (around $60K) compared to the average law school grad. UConn has a nice captive legal market in central Connecticut and access to biglaw for the top 10-15%. They get most of the clerkships in the state. Even the middle of the class will do fine with regional firms. The bottom quartile may struggle somewhat to get started but that is the same for even grads at top law schools. If there has ever been a big myth, it is that a top 14 law degree would guarantee you a good job on graduation. </p>
<p>Believe it or not, I actually do advise students to pursue legal careers (especially IP if they have the background) and I certainly recommend UConn to state residents because of the high value for the low tuition cost. If they can get an internship with a firm in their first or second year they will have a very good chance of a job on graduation. Maybe not with biglaw but still a hell of a lot better job opportunity than what they could have done with their undergrad degrees alone.</p>
<p>“Layoffs were once unthinkable.” Shortly before and after I started at a Wall Street firm in 1990 (along with about 75 other first years), the firm fired most of the preceding year first class to make room for us. It was about as ugly as it gets. Many of my classmates did not have jobs at or shortly following graduation, all that I have stayed in touch with or have knowledge of eventually found something and are doing fine, none have told me they wish they had not gone to law school. It may be getting done differently now, but we have seen this movie before.</p>
<p>I do recognize that the legal market is very tough right now, but I think it’s important to recognize that this is not isolated to the legal market. My wife teaches education at a State U. Out of last year’s 30 graduates, none (zero) found full time tenure track teaching jobs. From that perspective, 2/3 of a graduating class getting jobs within 6 months of graduation does not sound so bad. Things will get better–we are hiring in certain practice areas, anticipating growth. I continue to believe that a law school education is a great long term investment for most people.</p>
<p>“Even the middle of the class will do fine with regional firms. The bottom quartile may struggle somewhat to get started but that is the same for even grads at top law schools.”</p>
<ol>
<li><p>As to the claim that the middle of the class “will do fine with regional” firms a) even nepop concedes that 1/3 of a class of 172 is unemployed after one year and b) 28 (about 15%) are in very small firms that would not count as regional by any reasonable standard. You went to MIT; you do the math.</p></li>
<li><p>Suggesting that the market for students near the bottom of the UConn class is similar to that for students near the bottom of the Harvard class simply shows your ignorance.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>“Things will get better–we are hiring in certain practice areas, anticipating growth. I continue to believe that a law school education is a great long term investment for most people.”</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Maybe you’re right–maybe this time is not different. But I’ve been through a number of recessions in my lifetime, and (even leaving aside the structural changes in the practice of law) none has had this kind of anemic nonrecovery four years out.</p></li>
<li><p>Comparing law school to the (admittedly horrible) market for teachers is a nonstarter. Even at a state law school like UConn, the cost for three years is $90,000 if you live at home and $115,000 if you don’t. The question is whether the additional investment is likely to yield a substantial return.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I’m glad both of y’all did well; I’m sure you worked hard and deserve it. But to suggest to potential law students that the average state law school graduate is likely to do well in the foreseeable future is simply irresponsible.</p>
<p>I’m not sure I made my point clearly. I recognize that law grads will have more debt than a person graduating with a teaching degree. My (unstated) point is that this debate about law school is really a sub-part of the “is college worth it” debate that seems to have popped up with the recession. The job market is terrible for everyone. Many college grads, in many fields are facing a difficult job market right now. But to say that because of that people should not go to college, or law school, is incredibly short sighted. In the long run, for most people college and law school will be a good long term investment. I think what is irresponsilbe, and downright ignorant, is to suggets to young people today that it is not. What alternative are you proposing, stay at home with mom and dad? And I will tell the two UConn law grads that who started with us in September at over $100,000 that they made a poor decision to attend law school.</p>
<p>There are other professional alternatives to the practice of law. Heck, there are even law-related careers that are hiring – as I said, the practice support end is booming and those are six figure jobs with a bachelor’s degree. The issue is whether a person can even pay back those law school debts if they graduate from a middle of the road school in the middle of the class. Having a law degree, no job, and six figure debt is much worse than not having a law degree. There is also the option of patience, which is what I would tell people. Don’t rush right to law school from college. Work a little, save a lot, pay down some debt, make sure of your priorities because if you guess wrong, it could leave you unable to do other things like get married, buy a house, have kids. Of course, if you’re independently wealthy none of this matters. Go to law school and God bless you. The issue isn’t law school per se, it’s the debt.</p>
<p>*One of these days, someone’s going to get hit with a big malpractice judgment for this sort of thing, or get disciplined for facilitating the practice of law without a license. Not that most junior associates at big U.S. law firms necessarily have any idea what they’re doing (and I’ve met a lot of them in the last 30 years), but the sheer incompetence of some of the foreign lawyers trying to comply with U.S. state and federal law – or even to code and flag documents for relevance and privilege issues – is breathtaking.
*</p>
<p>I have worked in-house at two large international companies over the past 10 years, and I can tell you that except for purely local issues, neither company would consider outsourcing its legal work. As cellar said, there are clear concerns/liabilities associated with the unauthorized practice of law, along with purely competency concerns as Donna points out. </p>
<p>I’ve been practicing for almost 20 years, both in big firms and as in-house counsel. I’ve seen the biggest change at the really large law firms - even the regional ones. I’d still recommend law school to a child who was seriously interested in it, but I’d definitely push a smaller, regional, less expensive school.</p>
<p>“The issue is whether a person can even pay back those law school debts if they graduate from a middle of the road school in the middle of the class.” No question that such a person has more potential down side than in the form of debt than a person who graduates from a middle of the road college in the middle of the class but does not go to law school (and I suppose the same argument could be made for grad business school). But they also have more potential upside. I admit that my experience is anecdotal, but I graduated somewhat middle of the class (25th or 30th percentile, can’t remember) from what at the time was viewed as a middle of the road law school. I had to borrow to attend law school, what at the time seemed to me like a lot of money to. But I will earn over my career a multiple of what I would have earned if I had not attended law school. The loans I took out almost 30 years ago were long ago paid off and seem like not much money at all now. My belief, also based on my anecdotal experience, is that people who are good and who work hard do just fine evantually. I think it is a mistake to look at the success, or lack thereof, in finding a first job out of law school and reaching conclusions about the value of a law degree based on that. To pick up on Bogney’s point, I would guess that even the short term “success” rate for law school grads (e.g., 2/3 or more of UConn’s graduating class has jobs) is higher than the “success” rate for marriages (50% of marriages end in divorce). Does that mean people should not get married?</p>
<p>“I will tell the two UConn law grads that who started with us in September at over $100,000 that they made a poor decision to attend law school.”</p>
<p>So if I come up with a couple of lottery winners, does that prove that lottery tickets are a wise investment? Sometimes bad bets pay off big. That doesn’t mean they are actually good bets.</p>
<p>No one here is debating that there are graduates from every law school who do well. The question is whether borrowing for a mid-ranked law school is a safe bet, or even a good one. You can point to all the individual success stories you want, and it won’t change the fact that this is a bad bet for the majority of prospective law students in America. 90% of pre-1Ls seem to believe they’ll end up in the top 10% of the class. It’s easy for those actually in the top 10% to look back and think what a smart bet they made. In truth, they were lucky, and could easily have been in the larger group that lost.</p>
<p>“The loans I took out almost 30 years ago were long ago paid off and seem like not much money at all now.”</p>
<p>If you went to law school 30 years ago, the cost in real dollars really wasn’t that much compared to today’s tuition.</p>
<p>“I will tell the two UConn law grads that who started with us in September at over $100,000 that they made a poor decision to attend law school.”</p>
<p>I congratulate them and suspect they were at the top of their class. If you know you are going to be at the top, of course law school will have turned out to be a good investment. I also suspect that a degree from a T-14 school remains a good investment, notwithstanding the additional cost. The problem is that, ex ante, you can’t know whether you will be at the top of a state law school class. So the question is whether non-national law schools are a good investment for the average student. (And no, I’m not talking about someone from MIT who is well-positioned to practice patent law). On that point, I stand by my previous posts.</p>
<p>“What alternative are you proposing, stay at home with mom and dad?”</p>
<p>You have inadvertently put your finger on part of the real problem. Too many students, supported by some of the comments on this list, take the view that they can study whatever in undergraduate school because it is just a prelude to figuring out what you really want to do and. In this market and for the foreseeable future, students need to start thinking about acquiring marketable skills the minute they walk on to a college campus (and I don’t mean just learning how to “think,” whatever that means.</p>
<p>I think some of the “new” problems are: law school is a lot more expensive than it used to be (as is college), there are simply too many lawyers out there, the current economy and the sluggish recovery.</p>
<p>My own kid was sort of on the fence about law school. I’ve posted this before, but I paid for TWO sittings of the LSAT (which he never took and which you get back about $10 refund) and the expensive course to prepare for it before he bailed. He knew he needed to get at least a 170 on the LSAT to get into a top school and then he would have to bust his butt to do well to have a solid chance at a good job. He had clerked at a large Phila firm and saw how miserable the young lawyers were and finally decided he was tired of busting his butt since he, basically, did that since high school. He just didn’t see a career path that was assured and that would allow him to have some $$$ at the end of the tunnel since he was coming out of college in 2010. I’ll admit that I thought he was making a mistake and I was disappointed. I think he would have liked law school (well, as much as anyone likes law school) and would have been a good lawyer. </p>
<p>We know lots of Temple grads who graduated in 2010 and 2011 and hardly anyone has a job. One of the women (top 25%) is doing temp secretarial work. Temple grads used to get grabbed up in Philadelphia. Not anymore. Here in Nashville one of my former law partners is a Vandy grad (long ago) and was constantly getting stuff from Vandy asking for help in finding jobs for the law grads.</p>
<p>Also agree that being in the top 10% of your class isn’t that easy. Back in the day that wasn’t an issue. I came out of a top 3 law school and there was never any question about getting jobs. All you needed was the degree. NO ONE failed to get a job. The top grads clerked at a high level or went to huge, prestigious firms, the rest went to other firms. Very few went in-house, which is what I did. The “lesser” schools in Chicago, DePaul, Loyola and John Marshall…most of those grads got jobs, too, and populated the smaller firms or the firms out in the 'burbs. Now- those grads are the ones you are reading about who can’t pay back their loans and have no jobs.</p>
<p>One of my young neighbors is going to an unaccredited law school. I think you can practice law in our city, but nowhere else. Her family is so proud of her, and she is a very nice young woman. I am terrified for her in terms of job prospects. I hope she lucks into some public interest sort of thing, but I’m not optimistic.</p>
<p>Neopop, I went to Business School 30 years and borrowed heavily to do so, and my first job more than tripled the salary I had been earning previously. That doesn’t mean I tell people who ask me, “is business school a good investment” that it is. The answer is- it depends. It depends on your level of debt coming out of undergrad. it depends on the tier of B-school you can get admitted to and do well in. It depends on your GMAT score (much as we all hate standardized tests)-- prospective employers will ask your score even if you are Beta Gamma Sigma and and at the top of your B school class- a weak score may not even get you a first round interview at your top choice employer. It depends on the standard of living you are going to maintain while in grad school. Etc.</p>
<p>I would not extrapolate from my own experience to tell kids that an MBA is a great investment and that you’ll pay off your debt in a few years. I did- but there are tens of thousands of MBA’s who are basically earning what they did before they invested in their degree (and they’re in debt).</p>
<p>It is spurious logic to tell a 3L who couldn’t even get an interview this past August that his or her JD will pay out. It is absurd to tell one of the members of the “lost generation” (lawyers who graduated in 2009 and 2010) whose offers from top national and regional firms were delayed and then cancelled outright to tell them they can always practice patent law or get a great public interest job. The fact remains that right now, there are more lawyers than there are jobs. If you are going into debt to attend Touro or Suffolk or Cooley you are crazy. If you are going into debt to attend U Conn you should make sure you have cut your other expenses to the bone before you do so.</p>
<p>And expecting to be in the top 10% of your class just means that you are like 100% of your class- all of whom fully expect to make law review and clerk for someone famous when they graduate.</p>
<p>I have been in legal recruiting since the early '80s. This downturn is like nothing that the legal community has ever experienced. It made mole hills out of the other downturns that I thought were mountains back then. This one is a game changer. When I run an ad to fill an in house job, I receive so many resumes of unemployed former “biglaw” attorneys, that it is quite depressing.</p>