An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
monarchylover
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 5:17 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby monarchylover » Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:29 pm

As I've said on numerous other threads, the idea of making $$$ as a solo schmuck is a pipedream. Kids, these stats are from freaking CT, one of the richest states in the US. It's much worse elsewhere. People have no $$$ to piss away on shitlaw. And why should they? You can go online and handle most of your own legal problems with a few mouse-clicks.

Biglaw or bust, kids.[/quote]

medical malpractice insurance, hospitals, job sites, pharmaceutical companies, food manufacturers, toy manufactures and truck shipping companies have deep pockets and fuck up on a regular basis . . .

User avatar
ahduth
Posts: 2468
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 10:55 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby ahduth » Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:29 pm

Mick Haller wrote:Most people that go to law school are still going to land on their feet at some kind of bs job at a local bank or at an insurance company or something making like 45-50k. Not glamorous, but better work atmosphere and work-life balance than being a 2 a.m. plumber. IBR will cap their loan payments at 10% and everything will be okay.

Robot take a deep breath and relax.


I forget where he's going to law school, but you're confused. Big 4 experience still carries water anywhere you go, with no law degree at all. People who did audit are valuable - I'm not sure how big law uses/would use them, but they probably should.

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Mick Haller » Thu Jun 30, 2011 4:54 pm

robotclubmember wrote:sure i'm relaxed, but is that financially the right decision? 7 years of debt and lost income to make $50K, the same a skilled laborer makes with far less barrier to entry and opportunity cost? and there is a much greater risk of completely striking out.

appreciate my argument for what it is: it is not a financially sound decision. if people are going to work in those jobs, they should get trained for those jobs. the legal field is over-saturated.

i am here to bring the doom. shortly after, gloom will be provided in the reception hall. enjoy.


Of course it's not a desirable outcome, but there is no reward in life without taking some risks. I'd rather take a shot at a highly paid, enjoyable career, fall short, and then spend the rest of my life paying off my debts at a mediocre desk job rather than settle for a mediocre plumbing job from the outset.

User avatar
mpj_3050
Posts: 372
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby mpj_3050 » Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:42 pm

Mick Haller wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:sure i'm relaxed, but is that financially the right decision? 7 years of debt and lost income to make $50K, the same a skilled laborer makes with far less barrier to entry and opportunity cost? and there is a much greater risk of completely striking out.

appreciate my argument for what it is: it is not a financially sound decision. if people are going to work in those jobs, they should get trained for those jobs. the legal field is over-saturated.

i am here to bring the doom. shortly after, gloom will be provided in the reception hall. enjoy.


Of course it's not a desirable outcome, but there is no reward in life without taking some risks. I'd rather take a shot at a highly paid, enjoyable career, fall short, and then spend the rest of my life paying off my debts at a mediocre desk job rather than settle for a mediocre plumbing job from the outset.


Exactly. No one is advocating TTT schools that leave you with 100k plus in debt. I would take a desk job over a plumbing job any day of the week having done extensive manual labor. The shit sucks and kills your body.

areyouinsane
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:47 pm

In what way is plumbing a "mediocre" job? Hell, my buddy gets $450 flat to install a water heater which takes him all of half an hour. A couple Saturdays ago he did 5 of them in about 7 hours. As I said, many folks are upgrading to "green" heaters which use less electric/gas since there's a tax credit for same.

He also makes a fortune off small repairs, since wanna-be yuppies like you guys can't turn a wrench or sweat a pipe. Just to hook up a kitchen faucet or dishwasher he gets $200, which takes him all of fifteen minutes. The key in that business, as I said before, is HAVING THE LICENSE. He can send apprentices out to work independently in the field under his license number, pay them $15 an hour, and pocket the rest. And as I said before, he actually GOT PAID to learn his trade, as opposed to borrowing money and PAYING to learn it.

Bottom line is that plumbing is a highly lucrative trade, much more so than law. Many more people are willing to use LegalZoom to write their will or form their own LLC than hook up their own water heater. Think about it.

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Mick Haller » Thu Jun 30, 2011 5:55 pm

BLS wrote:Plumbers, pipelayers, pipefitters, and steamfitters are among the highest paid workers in construction occupations. Median hourly wages of wage and salary plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters were $21.94 in May 2008. The middle 50 percent earned between $16.63 and $29.66. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $13.22, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $37.93. Median hourly wages in the industries employing the largest numbers of plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters were as follows


It's decent money, but its shitty work and it's far below the $50 median hourly salary for attorneys. I'd rather take a gamble on the better career, even if it means I might be paying 10% of my income to student loans for the rest of my life.

areyouinsane
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:08 pm

It's decent money, but its shitty work and it's far below the $50 median hourly salary for attorneys. I'd rather take a gamble on the better career, even if it means I might be paying 10% of my income to student loans for the rest of my life.



Oh dear God, do you really believe the typical attorney in the US is making $50 an hour? That's 104 K a year assuming a 40 hour work week.

Here's an ad from 2 weeks ago which demands 2+ years substantive experience and pays a whopping $25 an hour:

--LinkRemoved--


4 years of college, 3 years of law school, the bar exam, and 2 years of experience for $25 an hour. Subtract even a modest student loan payment from this rate, and you're looking at $18-$19 an hour easily (plus, of course, no health insurance- it's a temp job),

Still ready to laugh at the plumbers?

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby AreJay711 » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:10 pm

Im glad im gunning for Texas

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Mick Haller » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:17 pm

Dude the very study linked in this thread shows a $44/hour national median salary. In my state it is $50/hour. And that study is out to show the supply/demand problems in the legal industry.

So yeah, we'll take your Craigslist ad as indicative of national trends.

EDIT: Keep in mind that I never argued that this is the average starting salary for new attorneys. I'm well aware that only a small subset (perhaps less than 50%?) of JD holders make this kind of money. I'm saying this 50% chance is worth the risk relative to settling for a $20/hour plumbing job from the outset.

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:30 pm

Mick Haller wrote:
BLS wrote:Plumbers, pipelayers, pipefitters, and steamfitters are among the highest paid workers in construction occupations. Median hourly wages of wage and salary plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters were $21.94 in May 2008. The middle 50 percent earned between $16.63 and $29.66. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $13.22, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $37.93. Median hourly wages in the industries employing the largest numbers of plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters were as follows


It's decent money, but its shitty work and it's far below the $50 median hourly salary for attorneys. I'd rather take a gamble on the better career, even if it means I might be paying 10% of my income to student loans for the rest of my life.


One thing that makes the stat misleading is the plumbing occupation is NOT concentrated in high COL markets like law. plumbers are distributed very evenly throughout the population. you'd have to adjust for COL since lawyers, while distributed throughout the population, are by no means EVENLY distributed, and since they concentrate in high COL hubs (i.e., DC NYC Chi LA etc), their market rate is driven upwards, but not necessarily as high as it looks when you take a fair apples to apples comparison (e.g., purchasing power)

And $50 may be the median for attorneys, but it's not the median for law grads. Remember the post earlier where I referenced the T2 grad who now works as a shift supervisor at McDonald's? The population we're concerned with is JDs, not just the attorneys who made it.

and that median salary is reflective of older established attorneys brought up in times like the 90's when big law and big business were practically lighting cigars with bennies and wiping their ass with jeffersons.

i'm coming from the perspective of someone who actually watched people get laid off, like watched it while it was happening. one of my market's biggest firms had to rescind ALL of its offers to its 2L SA's in '09, first after deferring them for half a year while they sat on their hands. can you imagine having to bounce back from that? and it was a good firm that was focused on T1 grads. do you guys really know the potential shit storm you could be walking into? a calculated risk is fine, but i don't see a lot of calculation, i just see denial. and let me be clear, this thread is targeted at people considering anything outside T1, because they are the glut that is overcrowding the field. don't justify yourself to me if you have a plan and it's a good one.

my beef is that people aren't putting real effort into making sure law school is right for them and are going for the wrong reasons, largely unaware of the risks (while ABA and law schools (from TTT to beloved Emory try to make sure you don't know those risks). a general unawareness of the economy (we will see another '09 in the next 3 years) and a general unawareness of structural changes (temps & tech) make the decision to go to law school even more laughable.

areyouinsane
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:33 pm

and that median salary is reflective of older established attorneys brought up in times like the 90's when big law and big business were practically lighting cigars with bennies and wiping their ass with jeffersons.


Jeffersons? They wiped their asses with nickles?

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby fatduck » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:35 pm

areyouinsane wrote:
and that median salary is reflective of older established attorneys brought up in times like the 90's when big law and big business were practically lighting cigars with bennies and wiping their ass with jeffersons.


Jeffersons? They wiped their asses with nickles?

war nickels, perhaps? silver has anti-septic properties.

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:37 pm

Mick Haller wrote:Dude the very study linked in this thread shows a $44/hour national median salary. In my state it is $50/hour. And that study is out to show the supply/demand problems in the legal industry.

So yeah, we'll take your Craigslist ad as indicative of national trends.

EDIT: Keep in mind that I never argued that this is the average starting salary for new attorneys. I'm well aware that only a small subset (perhaps less than 50%?) of JD holders make this kind of money. I'm saying this 50% chance is worth the risk relative to settling for a $20/hour plumbing job from the outset.


it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:38 pm

fatduck wrote:
areyouinsane wrote:
and that median salary is reflective of older established attorneys brought up in times like the 90's when big law and big business were practically lighting cigars with bennies and wiping their ass with jeffersons.


Jeffersons? They wiped their asses with nickles?

war nickels, perhaps? silver has anti-septic properties.


LOL i meant jacksons

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby AreJay711 » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:40 pm

$2 bills bros. They've been stocking up on them.

areyouinsane
Posts: 208
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 3:22 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jun 30, 2011 6:59 pm

it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Spot-on. Why bother having 160 K a year associates around doing routine tasks when you can bring in dirt-cheap, gutter wage temps and pay them spit? Esp when 9 of 10 associates will never make partner anyway? Why pay 160 K for 3 to 5 years of doc review and memo writing when squads of desperate losers will do the same shit for $25 an hour and no health insurance?

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Mick Haller » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:01 pm

robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Don't care about that. If things get that bad then we are all screwed anyway and we'll all just revert to Plan B: IBR.

User avatar
fatduck
Posts: 4186
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby fatduck » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:02 pm

Mick Haller wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Don't care about that. If things get that bad then we are all screwed anyway and we'll all just revert to Plan B: IBR.

my Plan B is: ACR

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:07 pm

fatduck wrote:
Mick Haller wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Don't care about that. If things get that bad then we are all screwed anyway and we'll all just revert to Plan B: IBR.

my Plan B is: ACR


LOL i support that.

This chart shows examples of IBR payment caps as a percentage of the borrower's family income, based on various incomes and family sizes:

Image

If you fuck it up, you can just marry someone who is willing to shit out a pile of kids so the gubmint can bail you out.
Last edited by robotclubmember on Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AreJay711
Posts: 3406
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:51 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby AreJay711 » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:07 pm

fatduck wrote:
Mick Haller wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Don't care about that. If things get that bad then we are all screwed anyway and we'll all just revert to Plan B: IBR.

my Plan B is: ACR

http://www.legion-recrute.com/en/

4 weeks paid vacation.

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Hannibal » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:10 pm

robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


I'd just like to point out that temporary hiring is across all sectors, and increases are especially prevalent during recoveries from recession. It's essentially a way for companies and firms to take a "wait and see" approach without the all problems (and benefits) associated with too much hiring or not enough hiring.

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:11 pm

Mick Haller wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


Don't care about that. If things get that bad then we are all screwed anyway and we'll all just revert to Plan B: IBR.


To be eligible for IBR in any way that meaningfully helps you, you have to be in so much debt that it would take 25 years to pay off, and you have to be making shit wages, presumably less than or similar to a plumber's. :)

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:15 pm

Hannibal wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


I'd just like to point out that temporary hiring is across all sectors, and increases are especially prevalent during recoveries from recession. It's essentially a way for companies and firms to take a "wait and see" approach without the all problems (and benefits) associated with too much hiring or not enough hiring.


Perhaps, but these temps aren't similar to attorneys. They are fundamentally different in that they just do doc review in sweat shop conditions. Like, in accounting, you get a temp cost accountant when you need a cost accountant. Then they get hired full-time if it works out. None of the legal temps are being brought on with the expectation of getting a full-time offer, and they aren't filling a position, it's the creation of a new kind of position. It's a new department. And why would law firms go back to old hiring models? They've indicated that they don't want to. They've found a way to cut costs and lean their operations. In many fields, temps are hired due to cyclical economic conditions to fill open slots. In law, a structural change has taken place to concentrate a certain type of work to temps, with the expectation and prediction that this new department will be leveraged more in the future for greater efficiency.

User avatar
Mick Haller
Posts: 1258
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 3:24 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Mick Haller » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:16 pm

how much debt would it take to get one of these sweet rides

Image

User avatar
Hannibal
Posts: 2213
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: An Analysis of the Lawyer Surplus

Postby Hannibal » Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:22 pm

robotclubmember wrote:
Hannibal wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:it is indicative of a trend. temp hiring has gone from 5.7% to 10% of the legal market in the last three years. estimates are that temp hiring will be increased 25% cumulatively in the next two years. last year temp agencies saw a 66% increase in job postings. it is an example of a growing trend. what is up with your addiction to obsolete historical data and your fear of taking an honest crack at forecasting into the future?


I'd just like to point out that temporary hiring is across all sectors, and increases are especially prevalent during recoveries from recession. It's essentially a way for companies and firms to take a "wait and see" approach without the all problems (and benefits) associated with too much hiring or not enough hiring.


Perhaps, but these temps aren't similar to attorneys. They are fundamentally different in that they just do doc review in sweat shop conditions. Like, in accounting, you get a temp cost accountant when you need a cost accountant. Then they get hired full-time if it works out. None of the legal temps are being brought on with the expectation of getting a full-time offer, and they aren't filling a position, it's the creation of a new kind of position. It's a new department. And why would law firms go back to old hiring models? They've indicated that they don't want to. They've found a way to cut costs and lean their operations. In many fields, temps are hired due to cyclical economic conditions to fill open slots. In law, a structural change has taken place to concentrate a certain type of work to temps, with the expectation and prediction that this new department will be leveraged more in the future for greater efficiency.


I think the structural change has been overstated, which comes from the exaggerations that everyone likes to make in a time of crisis. Everyone swears they'll be more mindful with money when they lose a lot, then get careless once they're comfortable. Things like e-discovery and more temp hiring will likely put a squeeze on the legal hiring market, but it's hard to tell how much that'll actually affect things.

BTW, there are still court reporters even though recording technology has made leaps and bounds. And they still make bank (less so in this economy obviously).




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: nathjf and 3 guests