Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29306
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sun Sep 21, 2014 8:06 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:Just because they are paying you more doesn't mean it's a real job.

But it means you can afford to live and get relevant experience while looking for a real job.


So does living in your moms basement. It's not a job and shouldn't count if you are trying to deduce employment percentages.

I mean, I get that it's designed to game the rankings, and that if you can afford to volunteer during that period you get the same benefit. But it still helps people who can't afford to spend the time volunteering. I've seen a lot of decent outcomes from these positions, and all else equal, would rather go to a school that offered them than that didn't.

Although lol at the idea that they're legit if they pay for bar prep. There are lots of legal jobs that don't pay for bar prep.

(I'll admit they would probably be better described as "bridge funding" or something similar, rather than jobs, but LST makes it pretty easy to break them out from the total, right?)

dixiecupdrinking

Gold
Posts: 3440
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Mon Sep 22, 2014 8:24 am

How is it not a "real job?"

User avatar
Desert Fox

Diamond
Posts: 18290
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby Desert Fox » Mon Sep 22, 2014 10:54 am

dixiecupdrinking wrote:How is it not a "real job?"


Because your employer isn't paying you.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
worldtraveler

Platinum
Posts: 8676
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:47 am

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby worldtraveler » Mon Sep 22, 2014 10:58 am

Desert Fox wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:How is it not a "real job?"


Because your employer isn't paying you.


Except that's true for every PI fellowship. I get your general point but that's dumb metric.

User avatar
Desert Fox

Diamond
Posts: 18290
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby Desert Fox » Mon Sep 22, 2014 11:09 am

worldtraveler wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:How is it not a "real job?"


Because your employer isn't paying you.


Except that's true for every PI fellowship. I get your general point but that's dumb metric.


I'm not totally sure I'd call a fellowship a job either, but at least in private fellowship you are selected by an independent party. Just getting some money because you failed to find a real job should not count.

And if it does, why even bother looking at employment stats?
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

timbs4339

Gold
Posts: 2774
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby timbs4339 » Mon Sep 22, 2014 12:33 pm

I don't consider school-funded fellowships real jobs for the simple reason that the vast majority of applicants, when told that "in three years you will be earning $15/hr in GW's Pathways to Practice program" would run away as fast as their legs could take them. There may be some small group of students for whom the school fellowship provides a much needed way to get their foot in the door at a small non-profit or in government because the recession has cut funding levels, but most take them like they would temp or part-time work.

Lord Randolph McDuff

Gold
Posts: 1591
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby Lord Randolph McDuff » Mon Sep 22, 2014 12:39 pm

It's a good internship.

Shouldn't be in the LST score, totally agree.

User avatar
Yukos

Gold
Posts: 1777
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:47 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby Yukos » Mon Sep 22, 2014 3:41 pm

Desert Fox wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:How is it not a "real job?"


Because your employer isn't paying you.


Except that's true for every PI fellowship. I get your general point but that's dumb metric.


I'm not totally sure I'd call a fellowship a job either, but at least in private fellowship you are selected by an independent party. Just getting some money because you failed to find a real job should not count.

And if it does, why even bother looking at employment stats?


I was taking a look at the bios of the people who got my school's fellowships this year. Just at a glance I counted two C.D. Cal. clerks, an S.D.N.Y. and a COA clerk (I guess the fellowship kicks in the year after the clerkship?). I'm gonna guess they probably could've gotten just about any biglaw job they wanted.

kingfish10

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:13 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby kingfish10 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:25 pm

Funny how big law people always feel compelled to speak about a field they know little to nothing about. Fellowships can be an nearly necessary first step to employment for a lot of PI people (esp. nonprofit people) at top schools. Lots of nonprofits can't afford to hire an inexperienced lawyer and train them, unlike big law firms (and, as has been mentioned, can't afford to hire someone before they have passed the bar). Fellowships give PI graduates a chance to get valuable work experience that qualifies them for jobs with 1-2 years of experience required. At top law schools fellowships are also very competitive, not a 'back up option,' and pay similar money to what you may get in a lot of smaller nonprofits as an entry-level hire. People who have them are doing full time real work at a nonprofit. And I don't think they care much whether their salary is coming from the school or the nonprofit itself, as long as they are getting a salary. Some fellowships may indeed be noncompetitive, paper pushing 'filler' jobs. And $12,000 a year is another question entirely. But it's ridiculous to write them all off without understanding the field or the purpose they serve.

User avatar
Desert Fox

Diamond
Posts: 18290
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby Desert Fox » Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:51 pm

kingfish10 wrote:Funny how big law people always feel compelled to speak about a field they know little to nothing about. Fellowships can be an nearly necessary first step to employment for a lot of PI people (esp. nonprofit people) at top schools. Lots of nonprofits can't afford to hire an inexperienced lawyer and train them, unlike big law firms (and, as has been mentioned, can't afford to hire someone before they have passed the bar). Fellowships give PI graduates a chance to get valuable work experience that qualifies them for jobs with 1-2 years of experience required. At top law schools fellowships are also very competitive, not a 'back up option,' and pay similar money to what you may get in a lot of smaller nonprofits as an entry-level hire. People who have them are doing full time real work at a nonprofit. And I don't think they care much whether their salary is coming from the school or the nonprofit itself, as long as they are getting a salary. Some fellowships may indeed be noncompetitive, paper pushing 'filler' jobs. And $12,000 a year is another question entirely. But it's ridiculous to write them all off without understanding the field or the purpose they serve.


It's still not a job.
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

kingfish10

New
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 7:13 pm

Re: Why does LST include school-funded into overall employed %?

Postby kingfish10 » Sat Oct 25, 2014 8:36 pm

I give up. Point is, when serious PI people look into law schools, having serious fellowships is a major plus. So maybe the rankings need to figure out a way to differentiate between fellowships, but having solid ones SHOULD be a positive in the rankings, unless the rankings are only meant to be relevant for Big Law interested applicants.



Return to “Choosing a Law School�

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests