High paying fields Forum

[thesealocust]

edit: never mind

[Xiaolong]

There is, however, one hole in your logic. There are people out there who are looking for a big law job who aren't fresh out of school.

Why do you think they are still looking for biglaw employment?

[Dr. Review]

Same reason any unemployed or unsatisfied person would apply for a job making the most money possible?

[gochrisgo]

_

[Xiaolong]

Same reason any unemployed or unsatisfied person would apply for a job making the most money possible?

Look, lateral hiring into biglaw is quite rare. You'd really have to have performed at a top level for several years at a small or medium sized firm to be able to move into big law. It's not like any old joe off the street with a JD from New York Law School can apply for a big law job and expect to get an offer.

Even if there is a group of lateral hires, that group is A) miniscule in size and B) not competing for first year associate positions.

[big_blue79]

Defense contracting/field contract work. Mostly easy work, recession-proof (if you're in the right type of field), good pay, great pay if deployed, and you wear jeans/boots to work. And deployment is not so bad, certainly not like a few years ago.

[Renzo]

After bonus, consulting and I-banking either start there or get pretty close. Obviously those fields have their issues in this economy.

Keep in mind that while it is POSSIBLE to obtain 6-figures after graduation from law school, every year there are 4-6 thousand such jobs and 45 thousand or so law school graduates. Most new lawyers make substantially less than six figures (40-50K is probably the mode).

Oh really? How do you know this?

Careful and exhaustive research from several sources. Want me to dig it up? Do you doubt some portion of what I said, or are you just curious?

I don't doubt the general thrust of your argument, I just think you present your numbers in a misleading way. One example: You claim that about 45000 law graduates compete for roughly 4000-6000 biglaw jobs every year. On the surface this is obviously the case, but I think this is misleading and needs further explanation, especially in the context of TLS. Most people here on TLS are aiming for T1 schools and most people here do end up at one.

Of the 45000 graduates, how many are actually competitve to land a big law job? In my understanding it's really only the T50 students that can claim to be competing for big law + maybe, on average, the top 5% from T2-T4. The number of law graduates however is incredibly inflated by people that are not competitive in the first place, i.e. 95% of the students that attend T2-T4 schools. If you assume an average of 250 grads per school, the T50 schools graduate about 12500 JDs every year. Then add to that the top 5% on average of the remaining schools ( i.e. 5% of 32500 graduates), thats roughly another 1600 people. So all in all you really have around 14000 grads that are actually standing a chance at landing one of roughly 4000-6000 biglaw jobs, not 45000.

Also bear in mind the number of people out of those 14000 competitve graduates that self-select into PI, governemnt, academia or market paying non-NLJ250 firms. I really have no grasp on how large that group is. In the end however you might end up with a number of anywhere between 10000-14000 grads that compete for 4000-6000 NLJ250 jobs every year.

Now, I am adding the caveat that my argument applies to someone attending a T50 or thereabouts. For someone considering Cooley, your argument is much more on point.

Let's assume that everything you say is true (even though your 250 grad per school is way too low, among other problems). That means 14,000 grads looking for 5000 jobs. That's roughly one in three getting the job, so two thirds of your very select group of contenders aren't getting a biglaw gig. And according to the NALP data, those two thirds can expect to make roughly $50k/yr, and will have the same $150k in debt as those that got biglaw jobs.

Now, as for the problems with your assumptions, there are many. For one, that 1/3 of your sample who get biglaw jobs aren't randomly distributed. The jobs trickle down. After the Yalies get all the jobs they want, Harvard and Stanford get their pick, then CCN, then the top 10, etc. Since YHSCCN is almost 2000 grads a year, and most of those grads will take biglaw gigs, lets say that leaves maybe 3200ish jobs for everyone else. Now if you give the top half (an overly pessimistic assumption) of MVPBN jobs,and the top 1/3 at DGC. All the sudden half of all the biglaw gigs are gone, a huge percentage of top school grads aren't in biglaw and are gobbling up all the good gov't/PI jobs, and all but a few T50 students are back to making $50k/yr with $150k in debt.

[jcl2]

Very few people earn six figure incomes early in their careers. There is no reliable short cut or easy path to that kind of income. Honestly, law school to biglaw is probably one of the shorter paths, but as previous posters have explained in detail, it is far from easy. Most doctors make that kind of money to start, but given the length of med school and residencies most will be in their early 30s by that time, and it isn't exactly easy to get into med school either. I guess ibankers can make that kind of money straight out of UG, but to get into that field you have to have gone to a very elite school, done well, and probably have some connections on top of that, same with most other business fields and business school grads.

Anyway, if you are looking to get rich quick without any work, stick to the lottery.

[housie07]

Let's assume that everything you say is true (even though your 250 grad per school is way too low, among other problems). That means 14,000 grads looking for 5000 jobs. That's roughly one in three getting the job, so two thirds of your very select group of contenders aren't getting a biglaw gig. And according to the NALP data, those two thirds can expect to make roughly $50k/yr, and will have the same $150k in debt as those that got biglaw jobs.

Now, as for the problems with your assumptions, there are many. For one, that 1/3 of your sample who get biglaw jobs aren't randomly distributed. The jobs trickle down. After the Yalies get all the jobs they want, Harvard and Stanford get their pick, then CCN, then the top 10, etc. Since YHSCCN is almost 2000 grads a year, and most of those grads will take biglaw gigs, lets say that leaves maybe 3200ish jobs for everyone else. Now if you give the top half (an overly pessimistic assumption) of MVPBN jobs,and the top 1/3 at DGC. All the sudden half of all the biglaw gigs are gone, a huge percentage of top school grads aren't in biglaw and are gobbling up all the good gov't/PI jobs, and all but a few T50 students are back to making $50k/yr with $150k in debt.

First, if we are assuming every single person at HYSCCN wants a biglaw job (and many don't, as these are the schools who take a disproportionate number of clerkships, not to mention PI, etc), that does not mean that anyone who does not get biglaw suddenly defaults to the median salary of all lawyers. There is a vast expanse of middle ground between biglaw pay and "average" pay.

Also, I think there are other "problems with your assumptions." Correct if I'm wrong, TLS, but is the hiring process just a big line corresponding to USN rankings? Of course people at the top schools are going to have good prospects, but will that stop a big Nashville firm from hiring Vanderbilt grads? It doesn't seem likely.

[Renzo]

Let's assume that everything you say is true (even though your 250 grad per school is way too low, among other problems). That means 14,000 grads looking for 5000 jobs. That's roughly one in three getting the job, so two thirds of your very select group of contenders aren't getting a biglaw gig. And according to the NALP data, those two thirds can expect to make roughly $50k/yr, and will have the same $150k in debt as those that got biglaw jobs.

Now, as for the problems with your assumptions, there are many. For one, that 1/3 of your sample who get biglaw jobs aren't randomly distributed. The jobs trickle down. After the Yalies get all the jobs they want, Harvard and Stanford get their pick, then CCN, then the top 10, etc. Since YHSCCN is almost 2000 grads a year, and most of those grads will take biglaw gigs, lets say that leaves maybe 3200ish jobs for everyone else. Now if you give the top half (an overly pessimistic assumption) of MVPBN jobs,and the top 1/3 at DGC. All the sudden half of all the biglaw gigs are gone, a huge percentage of top school grads aren't in biglaw and are gobbling up all the good gov't/PI jobs, and all but a few T50 students are back to making $50k/yr with $150k in debt.

First, if we are assuming every single person at HYSCCN wants a biglaw job (and many don't, as these are the schools who take a disproportionate number of clerkships, not to mention PI, etc), that does not mean that anyone who does not get biglaw suddenly defaults to the median salary of all lawyers. There is a vast expanse of middle ground between biglaw pay and "average" pay.

Also, I think there are other "problems with your assumptions." Correct if I'm wrong, TLS, but is the hiring process just a big line corresponding to USN rankings? Of course people at the top schools are going to have good prospects, but will that stop a big Nashville firm from hiring Vanderbilt grads? It doesn't seem likely.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here about the "vast expanse of middle ground." If you think there are a lot of jobs that pay less than biglaw market, but more than the median, you are dead wrong. In fact, the median is really meaningless, because nearly everyone is making much more or much less.

You are right, big firms that have a large presence in a secondary market do hire local school grads, but in the grand scheme of all biglaw jobs, those are a relatively small number. As an example, Hogan & Hartson (or Hogan Lovell as they will soon be known) has a large Denver presence, but they are primarily a DC firm. The Denver office will hire 1 or 2 people a year, and will consider CU/DU grads (plus any top school grads that really, really want to be in Colorado); but the DC and NYC offices of the firm will hire 30 or more between them, and almost entirely from top schools.

[s.hasan546]

People who think Big Law isn't dead should listen to some of the posters in this thread. Stop comparing the statistics from 2008. That economy will never return. Remember all the current grads that are getting deferred or not even hired will be competing for future positions. Most gov't/PI positions are taken by competitive students who want LRAP or just a genuine interest. You'd be surprised at the amount of applicants from the t14 apply to ADA positions; etc. Most people who still are in the 03-08 type of thinking that your going to make bank just because your a law school grad has a big awakening coming for them.

Law schools and the ABA have shot themselves in the foot. They graduate over 40k students a year when there is an abundance of lawyers in this country. Most of these schools like hofstra, NYLS are giving people a toilet paper degree for $100k+ in debt.
Why do you think Doctors and dentists make so much money? The AAMC and ADA limit seats for doctors and dentists. I have switched to becoming a dentist. There is only about 6000 seats a year. Now if your lucky enough to get admission, your on your way to making 100k starting out. Dental has no residency and is only 1 year longer than law school with similar costs. And they start out at over $100k while averaging 30 hours a week.

However, either way your going to bust your ass. MD and DDS/DMD schools require over a 3.5 gpa for acceptance and even than its hard. Plus 90 percentile + on their respective admissions tests + Strong EC's.

Even these fields have their issues. MDs are worried about losing their high salaries b.c of all this health care issues. Dentists are still going to make $$ but like i said admission is extremely tough; arguably tougher than law school. Also consider that for Health professions your normally not a bullshit interpretative dance major, like you can be for law school. Your taking tough science classes normally. Now under grads school range in difficulty but normally science is tough no matter where you take it. At least normally a lot tougher than a poli sci. major.

Either way your going to bust your ass sometime or another to make your $. Either bust your ass throughout Undergrad + Grad or bust your ass through your career. I coasted through undergrad and got a pretty good lsat and got into a top 30. Now that i switched and started to take hard Sciences classes they are kicking me in the ass. Ive never studied like this before.

[Xiaolong]

Now, as for the problems with your assumptions, there are many. For one, that 1/3 of your sample who get biglaw jobs aren't randomly distributed. The jobs trickle down. After the Yalies get all the jobs they want, Harvard and Stanford get their pick, then CCN, then the top 10, etc. Since YHSCCN is almost 2000 grads a year, and most of those grads will take biglaw gigs, lets say that leaves maybe 3200ish jobs for everyone else. Now if you give the top half (an overly pessimistic assumption) of MVPBN jobs,and the top 1/3 at DGC. All the sudden half of all the biglaw gigs are gone, a huge percentage of top school grads aren't in biglaw and are gobbling up all the good gov't/PI jobs, and all but a few T50 students are back to making $50k/yr with $150k in debt.[/quote]


Why make up numbers when one can calculate. In 08, 3900 NLJ 250 jobs went to the T20 grads. That leaves about 1000-2000 jobs for the rest (i.e. 7500 people from the T50 if you assume 250 grads per school). BTW. I am not even sure this is a correct number, I don't know who came up with it.

But it proves my point, don't focus on the overall number of law grads every year, but look at the pool of people from schools that are competitive in biglaw placement.

[Renzo]

Why make up numbers when one can calculate. In 08, 3900 NLJ 250 jobs went to the T20 grads. That leaves about 1000-2000 jobs for the rest (i.e. 7500 people from the T50 if you assume 250 grads per school). BTW. I am not even sure this is a correct number, I don't know who came up with it.

But it proves my point, don't focus on the overall number of law grads every year, but look at the pool of people from schools that are competitive in biglaw placement.

So, your point is that less than one in four of the elite law students will get a job with an NLJ25 firm, and that somehow contributes to your larger point that career prospects for lawyers aren't dire?

Oh, and 250 per school is way low.

edit:fixed terrible typing

[scionb4]

This field ended up paying pretty well, too, because people came.

--ImageRemoved--

[Xiaolong]

Why make up numbers when one can calculate. In 08, 3900 NLJ 250 jobs went to the T20 grads. That leaves about 1000-2000 jobs for the rest (i.e. 7500 people from the T50 if you assume 250 grads per school). BTW. I am not even sure this is a correct number, I don't know who came up with it.

But it proves my point, don't focus on the overall number of law grads every year, but look at the pool of people from schools that are competitive in biglaw placement.

So, your point is that less than one in four of the elite law students will get a job with an NLJ25 firm, and that somehow contributes to your larger point that career prospects for lawyers aren't dire?

Oh, and 250 per school is way low.

edit:fixed terrible typing

45000 : 180= 250. Feel free to calculate the exact average of grads for the T20 or T50, but I assume its roughly around the 250 figure.

1 in 4? What are you talking about? In 08, the T20 sent more than 50% of their grads to NLJ250 firms. I know the chart is outdated, but nevertheless, its basic economics that economies go in cycles and after every bust there will be another boom. If you want to debate that, please feel free to revolutionize modern economic theory.

[thequest]

This field ended up paying pretty well, too, because people came.

--ImageRemoved--

Are you talking about baseball or acting?

[James Bond]

This field ended up paying pretty well, too, because people came.

--ImageRemoved--

Are you talking about baseball or acting?

talking to dead people is TCR

[Renzo]

45000 : 180= 250. Feel free to calculate the exact average of grads for the T20 or T50, but I assume its roughly around the 250 figure.

1 in 4? What are you talking about? In 08, the T20 sent more than 50% of their grads to NLJ250 firms. I know the chart is outdated, but nevertheless, its basic economics that economies go in cycles and after every bust there will be another boom. If you want to debate that, please feel free to revolutionize modern economic theory.

I give up. I can't even figure out what you are arguing anymore. I keep letting you use whatever numbers you want, and I still don't get it. Again, are you saying that because half of the students at T20 schools got good jobs (at the height of the boom), the labor market for lawyers isn't horrible?

[scionb4]

This field ended up paying pretty well, too, because people came.

--ImageRemoved--

Are you talking about baseball or acting?

You've never seen this movie, have you? Otherwise you'd get that this was a JOKE.

[Xiaolong]

45000 : 180= 250. Feel free to calculate the exact average of grads for the T20 or T50, but I assume its roughly around the 250 figure.

1 in 4? What are you talking about? In 08, the T20 sent more than 50% of their grads to NLJ250 firms. I know the chart is outdated, but nevertheless, its basic economics that economies go in cycles and after every bust there will be another boom. If you want to debate that, please feel free to revolutionize modern economic theory.

I give up. I can't even figure out what you are arguing anymore. I keep letting you use whatever numbers you want, and I still don't get it. Again, are you saying that because half of the students at T20 schools got good jobs (at the height of the boom), the labor market for lawyers isn't horrible?

What am I arguing? You claim 250 grads per school is way low! I am simply showing you that 250 is the average number if you divide the total number of law school grads (45000) by the number of accreited LS (180 or so); I really don't see how this is "way low". Again, feel free to come up with the exact average for the T20 and T50.

If you think the jobmarket is abysmal for lawyers, I am wondering why you are even considering going to law schoo? I mean what do you expect? Some form of guarantee that you will get a 160K job by graduation? There is always a risk that you wil end up not getting the job you want, regardless of the economy and regardless of the school you attend; if you can't deal with that maybe you find a profession with less uncertainty.

[Renzo]

45000 : 180= 250. Feel free to calculate the exact average of grads for the T20 or T50, but I assume its roughly around the 250 figure.

1 in 4? What are you talking about? In 08, the T20 sent more than 50% of their grads to NLJ250 firms. I know the chart is outdated, but nevertheless, its basic economics that economies go in cycles and after every bust there will be another boom. If you want to debate that, please feel free to revolutionize modern economic theory.

I give up. I can't even figure out what you are arguing anymore. I keep letting you use whatever numbers you want, and I still don't get it. Again, are you saying that because half of the students at T20 schools got good jobs (at the height of the boom), the labor market for lawyers isn't horrible?

What am I arguing? You claim 250 grads per school is way low! I am simply showing you that 250 is the average number if you divide the total number of law school grads (45000) by the number of accreited LS (180 or so); I really don't see how this is "way low". Again, feel free to come up with the exact average for the T20 and T50.

If you think the jobmarket is abysmal for lawyers, I am wondering why you are even considering going to law schoo? I mean what do you expect? Some form of guarantee that you will get a 160K job by graduation? There is always a risk that you wil end up not getting the job you want, regardless of the economy and regardless of the school you attend; if you can't deal with that maybe you find a profession with less uncertainty.

It seems to that you have gone from arguing that the statistics belie the reality of the job market to arguing that 45000/180=250.
I have not argued that no one should go to law school, nor have I questioned your reasons. I have merely tried to point to proof that most lawyers will make a very meager salary coming out of law school, including many graduates of top schools.

[Nom Sawyer]

One of the highest paying fields out there:

--ImageRemoved--

[Xiaolong]

45000 : 180= 250. Feel free to calculate the exact average of grads for the T20 or T50, but I assume its roughly around the 250 figure.

1 in 4? What are you talking about? In 08, the T20 sent more than 50% of their grads to NLJ250 firms. I know the chart is outdated, but nevertheless, its basic economics that economies go in cycles and after every bust there will be another boom. If you want to debate that, please feel free to revolutionize modern economic theory.

I give up. I can't even figure out what you are arguing anymore. I keep letting you use whatever numbers you want, and I still don't get it. Again, are you saying that because half of the students at T20 schools got good jobs (at the height of the boom), the labor market for lawyers isn't horrible?

What am I arguing? You claim 250 grads per school is way low! I am simply showing you that 250 is the average number if you divide the total number of law school grads (45000) by the number of accreited LS (180 or so); I really don't see how this is "way low". Again, feel free to come up with the exact average for the T20 and T50.

If you think the jobmarket is abysmal for lawyers, I am wondering why you are even considering going to law schoo? I mean what do you expect? Some form of guarantee that you will get a 160K job by graduation? There is always a risk that you wil end up not getting the job you want, regardless of the economy and regardless of the school you attend; if you can't deal with that maybe you find a profession with less uncertainty.

It seems to that you have gone from arguing that the statistics belie the reality of the job market to arguing that 45000/180=250.
I have not argued that no one should go to law school, nor have I questioned your reasons. I have merely tried to point to proof that most lawyers will make a very meager salary coming out of law school, including many graduates of top schools.

Actually I was arguing that someone else was using statistics in a way that are misleading for people attending T50 or even T20 schools. You made the point earlier that biglaw jobs are not distributed randomly. Good point! So it doesn't make sense to claim that 45000 grads are competing for 6000 biglaw jobs, when in reality the vast majority of that group is excluded a priori from competing for those jobs because they attend T2-T4 schools. In the same sense is it misleading to use general statistics that show the salary distribution of ALL law graduates per year, since these numbers will be inflated (or rather deflated) by a large number of people from schools that offer quite limited (high paying) job opportunities, again T2-T4 schools.

To your second point about meager salaries, I have yet to see the statistics that show that most of the people not making big law out of a T50 or a T20 make around 40-50K a year. I can see that there will be a good number of people starting out with those salaries, but I do not in any way believe that this holds true across the board. I am not saying anything about people outside the T50.

[Renzo]

Actually I was arguing that someone else was using statistics in a way that are misleading for people attending T50 or even T20 schools. You made the point earlier that biglaw jobs are not distributed randomly. Good point! So it doesn't make sense to claim that 45000 grads are competing for 6000 biglaw jobs, when in reality the vast majority of that group is excluded a priori from competing for those jobs because they attend T2-T4 schools. In the same sense is it misleading to use general statistics that show the salary distribution of ALL law graduates per year, since these numbers will be inflated (or rather deflated) by a large number of people from schools that offer quite limited (high paying) job opportunities, again T2-T4 schools.

To your second point about meager salaries, I have yet to see the statistics that show that most of the people not making big law out of a T50 or a T20 make around 40-50K a year. I can see that there will be a good number of people starting out with those salaries, but I do not in any way believe that this holds true across the board. I am not saying anything about people outside the T50.

I don't think the statistics are as misleading as you do.

Where do you think the 70% (in a boom year) of the class who don't end up at NLJ250 firms at schools ranked in the 20's go? Yes, there are some mid-size firms in these schools' home markets that pay less than biglaw market rate, but a large salary nonetheless. But there aren't enough of those jobs for 60% of the classes (again, in the best year; it might be 80% now).

Lets use Boston as an example. NALP lists 44 firms in Mass. If you take out all the NLJ250 firms to avoid double counting, and look at how many employees the firms that are left hired in 2007 (so that we are as optimistic as can possibly be), there are about 150 jobs. BU and BC have roughly 280 students each, for a total of 560. Subtract the 30% that are going to NLJ250 firms and you have 392 students looking at 150 midlaw jobs (assuming no out-of-state competition). Where are the other 242 students, or 42% of the class going? And this is at schools with a robust natural legal market; if you try the same math for U of Iowa it looks much, much worse.

Now, I realize my methodology isn't flawless. Sure, some of these students go to in-house dept's or to government work or something. But that doesn't change the fact that there are only enough biglaw/midlaw jobs for 60% of the class in boom times in a very active legal market.

[reasonable_man]

Let's assume that everything you say is true (even though your 250 grad per school is way too low, among other problems). That means 14,000 grads looking for 5000 jobs. That's roughly one in three getting the job, so two thirds of your very select group of contenders aren't getting a biglaw gig. And according to the NALP data, those two thirds can expect to make roughly $50k/yr, and will have the same $150k in debt as those that got biglaw jobs.

Now, as for the problems with your assumptions, there are many. For one, that 1/3 of your sample who get biglaw jobs aren't randomly distributed. The jobs trickle down. After the Yalies get all the jobs they want, Harvard and Stanford get their pick, then CCN, then the top 10, etc. Since YHSCCN is almost 2000 grads a year, and most of those grads will take biglaw gigs, lets say that leaves maybe 3200ish jobs for everyone else. Now if you give the top half (an overly pessimistic assumption) of MVPBN jobs,and the top 1/3 at DGC. All the sudden half of all the biglaw gigs are gone, a huge percentage of top school grads aren't in biglaw and are gobbling up all the good gov't/PI jobs, and all but a few T50 students are back to making $50k/yr with $150k in debt.

First, if we are assuming every single person at HYSCCN wants a biglaw job (and many don't, as these are the schools who take a disproportionate number of clerkships, not to mention PI, etc), that does not mean that anyone who does not get biglaw suddenly defaults to the median salary of all lawyers. There is a vast expanse of middle ground between biglaw pay and "average" pay.

Also, I think there are other "problems with your assumptions." Correct if I'm wrong, TLS, but is the hiring process just a big line corresponding to USN rankings? Of course people at the top schools are going to have good prospects, but will that stop a big Nashville firm from hiring Vanderbilt grads? It doesn't seem likely.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here about the "vast expanse of middle ground." If you think there are a lot of jobs that pay less than biglaw market, but more than the median, you are dead wrong. In fact, the median is really meaningless, because nearly everyone is making much more or much less.

You are right, big firms that have a large presence in a secondary market do hire local school grads, but in the grand scheme of all biglaw jobs, those are a relatively small number. As an example, Hogan & Hartson (or Hogan Lovell as they will soon be known) has a large Denver presence, but they are primarily a DC firm. The Denver office will hire 1 or 2 people a year, and will consider CU/DU grads (plus any top school grads that really, really want to be in Colorado); but the DC and NYC offices of the firm will hire 30 or more between them, and almost entirely from top schools.

+1 to everything said by Rezno thus far.