PSA: Roughly 60% of 1st yrs will land b/t the salary "modes"

[flcath]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

[flcath]

I'm srry, I meant 40%. 60% in, 40% out.

[rman1201]

Cool story, bro.



In all seriousness though I am interested in ND's stats, can you send them to me?

[kapital98]

You're absolutely right. The 40% should be given more consideration but is left out of most threads. I would place a large wager that the reported salary is biased towards the two peaks. With more complete/accurate reporting the % between the two peaks would increase.

*edit* Take the data and make wage ranges (ex: $60,000-$90,000) to illustrate your point in a bar graph...

[09042014]

~45 of the people on that graph make 60K and lower. And that is ~45% of reported salary, which only includes the employed. The survey only covers about half of all grads.

[flcath]

~45 36% of the people on that graph make 60K and lower. And that is ~45% 36% of reported salary, which only includes the employed.

Not that it totally brightens the picture. The graph does include those employed outside of law, which means that only the truly unemployed (extremely rare at 9 months, usually like 1% if I recall) are omitted.

The survey only covers about half of all grads.

NALP indicates that it makes very little difference for those in the middle. The aforesaid "business" (table-waiting) category are harder to find for survey, while those in large firms are extraordinarily easy to find. NALP doesn't just correct for that after the fact; they tailor their survey techniques accordingly.

*edit* Take the data and make wage ranges (ex: $60,000-$90,000) to illustrate your point in a bar graph...

I'm probably not gonna do that, but yes, it would illustrate the point quite nicely.

[Veyron]

This is wrong because

(1) Those are only employed people
(2) Different markets have different "modes" (e.g. some secondary market might have biglaw at 110 and everything else at 30-40, but on a nationwide graph, their biglaw shows up as between the modes, doesn't mean the jobs are any easier to get or even that they pay differently after adjusting for COL differences).

[flcath]

This is wrong because

(1) Those are only employed people
(2) Different markets have different "modes" (e.g. some secondary market might have biglaw at 110 and everything else at 30-40, but on a nationwide graph, their biglaw shows up as between the modes, doesn't mean the jobs are any easier to get or even that they pay differently after adjusting for COL differences).

(1) There are very, very few truly unemployed ppl at 9 months out. Graph includes "business" category encompassing non-law jobs.

(2a) Those jobs would be included in "between the modes" jobs regardless of whether you call them Biglaw or not, and are thus included in the set of jobs that 40% of us will get. There are also some very prestigious, hard-to-get PI jobs in the left mode; that doesn't change anything in the big picture.

(2b) I think what you're suggesting is that when we see that school x puts 30% of its grads into NLJ250 firms, one has to account for the fact that some of those (but very few, if you check the NLJ250 salaries) jobs pay <$160K. That's fine, but it doesn't then follow that fewer than 40% of LS grads get paid in the middle range, it just means that more than 25% (the integration of the $160K peak) are in Biglaw.

[Veyron]

This is wrong because

(1) Those are only employed people
(2) Different markets have different "modes" (e.g. some secondary market might have biglaw at 110 and everything else at 30-40, but on a nationwide graph, their biglaw shows up as between the modes, doesn't mean the jobs are any easier to get or even that they pay differently after adjusting for COL differences).

(1) There are very, very few truly unemployed ppl at 9 months out. Graph includes "business" category encompassing non-law jobs.

(2a) Those jobs would be included in "between the modes" jobs regardless of whether you call them Biglaw or not, and are thus included in the set of jobs that 40% of us will get. There are also some very prestigious, hard-to-get PI jobs in the left mode; that doesn't change anything in the big picture.

(2b) I think what you're suggesting is that when we see that school x puts 30% of its grads into NLJ250 firms, one has to account for the fact that some of those (but very few, if you check the NLJ250 salaries) jobs pay <$160K. That's fine, but it doesn't then follow that fewer than 40% of LS grads get paid in the middle range, it just means that more than 25% (the integration of the $160K peak) are in Biglaw.

I think you misunderstand what I am getting at with respect to (2). Its more that one shouldn't think that there are plentiful options if one strikes out at "biglaw" on the basis of the data you presented because much of the areas between the modes IS (regional) biglaw which is no easier to get than NYC 160.

[Aqualibrium]

I thought you were dropping out of law school op?

[rose711]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

[TatteredDignity]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

[Veyron]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

180

[rose711]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

I actually don't have any loans and I graduated several years ago. I can't even tell if this reply is being sarcastic or not.
Sorry, I don't understand the statistical discussions, but I want to. I have several friends and relatives interested in applying to law schools and in the current law market and they are asking me for help. I will not be in a position to offer them jobs when they graduate. I don't think they should take on major debt to go to law school and I am trying to back up that position. I am conservative so major to me is anything more than $50,000.

So can you try explaining it again?

[dood]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

did u guys plan this back and forth? b/c i literally laughed for 45 to 50 seconds. 1 fucking 80.

[Veyron]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

I actually don't have any loans and I graduated several years ago. I can't even tell if this reply is being sarcastic or not.
Sorry, I don't understand the statistical discussions, but I want to. I have several friends and relatives interested in applying to law schools and in the current law market and they are asking me for help. I will not be in a position to offer them jobs when they graduate. I don't think they should take on major debt to go to law school and I am trying to back up that position. I am conservative so major to me is anything more than $50,000.

So can you try explaining it again?

If you think he is being sarcastic, you really HAVE been out of the game for a while.

[dood]

the reply is sarcastic, but true, which makes is funny.

[applepiecrust]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

What's with the blatant anti-Georgetown trolling all around?

[Veyron]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

Ok, I'll bite, how does one land a "midlaw" gig?

[TatteredDignity]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

Ok, I'll bite, how does one land a "midlaw" gig?

Easy. Network, hustle, use all of your resources, keep a positive attitude, find a firm that realizes your personality is a good fit for them, and hope it's the one out of every 3 years they decide to hire for an entry-level position.

[fatduck]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

Ok, I'll bite, how does one land a "midlaw" gig?

Easy. Network, hustle, use all of your resources, keep a positive attitude, find a firm that realizes your personality is a good fit for them, and hope it's the one out of every 3 years they decide to hire for an entry-level position.

i think you lost him

[JazzOne]

Which firms pay $200K?

[TatteredDignity]

Wachtell.

[Veyron]

NOT in them.

This consideration is almost categorically overlooked when weighing LS options. Also, these jobs--to the extent to which they go to first years at all (which is admittedly not the standard midlaw hiring model)--DO tend to go to those who fall just shy of Biglaw. Most (yes, most: over 50%) ppl who miss Biglaw at the T13s go into the middle range, as do most T25ish kids.

I have a .pdf document (which I will post if TLS lets me) accounting for every member of the NDLS c/o 2009--firm and city. MOST of them are midlaw gigs; the 2nd largest number is Biglaw; the 3rd is gov't work.

I think much of TLS does not stop to think about how these graphs work. There is a spike at $160K b/c of market matching by firms; the "spikes" are not as significant as the overall integration of the various salary ranges. There is enough integrated "area" in the middle range to form several similarly-sized spikes... but that doesn't happen, since there isn't the widespread salary matching in that sector.

Ok, I'll bite, how does one land a "midlaw" gig?

Easy. Network, hustle, use all of your resources, keep a positive attitude, find a firm that realizes your personality is a good fit for them, and hope it's the one out of every 3 years they decide to hire for an entry-level position.

Right but is it thru SA programs? I've seen a lot of firms that seem like "midlaw" but have SA programs. However, I hear the offer rates suck.

Edit: Wait, you a 0L, WTF are you doing giving advice? STFU

[TatteredDignity]

I don't understand what this is saying. Can you explain it another way?

There's like an 80% chance you won't be able to pay your loans after graduation.

I actually don't have any loans and I graduated several years ago. I can't even tell if this reply is being sarcastic or not.
Sorry, I don't understand the statistical discussions, but I want to. I have several friends and relatives interested in applying to law schools and in the current law market and they are asking me for help. I will not be in a position to offer them jobs when they graduate. I don't think they should take on major debt to go to law school and I am trying to back up that position. I am conservative so major to me is anything more than $50,000.

So can you try explaining it again?

No sarcasm.

For those with 6 figures of debt, it's unlikely that debt will be serviceable with a salary between 40 and 60K (it would give pauper a new meaning). There's a better chance that one could do that making, say, 80K, but those jobs are few. The next viable option is biglaw. The chances of obtaining a biglaw job vary widely depending on where one attends, but outside of T6 or so, your chances are no better than 1 in 3.