Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
FeelTheHeat
Posts: 5203
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:32 am

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby FeelTheHeat » Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:19 pm

robotclubmember wrote:To add, if your opportunities, tastes, and abilities are suited to a career in law, and the viability of your plans are supported by reality and not some fiction of 99% employment, then you should go to law school.


As to contribute something to this thread, while I don't agree with all of the above poster's opinions, this is a well-articulated and solid conclusion.

User avatar
pattonthicke
Posts: 102
Joined: Mon Nov 01, 2010 9:09 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby pattonthicke » Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:32 pm

robotclubmember wrote:Like I mentioned to another poster, it's a tough balance to strike when approaching this issue. In my experience, if you say all law schools are potentially a bad investment (key word = potentially, and it's true), you get discredited for being chicken little, crying wolf what have you. If you call out some schools but not others, you'll get called out on deriding people's personal decisions. There is no safe way to introduce the issue without getting called out by someone or another. The best I was able to do was to say that while the rule in T14 is good prospects, there are plenty of exceptions. And that it is a gamble beneath a certain level of school, and ymmv.

There is a reason I post this stuff in admissions and not the current student forum. I'm only interested in piling on to influence more people not to go to law school or exercise caution in doing so. I can def appreciate the bad-economy-thread fatigue that current law school students on this forum experience, but I haven't been around as long, and there are new people piling in everyday to whom this is real news, this is shit they never even dreamed of. The sheer volume of law school students, the disarray that the supply demand curve for the legal field is in is evidence that many prospectives simply do not know what is going on or are in denial. This article clearly shows that the supply demand EQ has shifted and the price of lawyers has fallen. That's why it affects me. For every lawyer that goes to law school without a plan, that doubles down on a useless lib arts degree with a useless law degree, it dilutes the field for the rest of us that have a genuine interest in the law and have done their due diligence. I have a direct interest, because the price of my services (i.e., my salary) will be diminished in the future, as is shown in the article. But it will hurt you and those going to TTT's far more than it will ever hurt me, and that's the part that I care about most (believe it or not). Also, it's wasteful of taxpayer dollars for students with a non-viable plan to take federally backed loans they can't repay or discharge and get a useless law degree with it.

You are in law school. This article is not aimed at you. You have already made your supper and you will eat your peas. This article is aimed at prospective applicants. It's a good article that deserved a share, and ultimately exposing lurkers to the discussion is a good thing I think.

P.S.: I am not a MOTHERFUCKER!!!


1. I disagree. TTT grads and T14ers were never competing for the same jobs in the 1st place. You can add 15000 TTT law schools and that wouldnt make one bit a difference where V100 firms hire and how much they pay.

2. My apologies, you are not an mf

3. Although you somewhat acknowledge it, you making the cutoff at t-14 is somewhat arbitrary. Going to one of the lower ones at a high price is pretty risky

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jul 14, 2011 10:36 pm

sunynp wrote:Given the terrible reporting of data by law schools, which everyone knows exists, how reliable is this information in the article? Could there have been over-reporting from the schools? How reliable was the information for previous years?

Also from the article:
The national median starting salary at law firms dropped to $104,000 from $130,000 in 2009, reflecting a shift in the distribution of jobs and salary adjustments at some firms, the NALP said today. The report cited information submitted by 192 laws schools and covering 93 percent of 2010 graduates.
“This is in some ways the fallout of 2008,” NALP Executive Director James Leipold said in a phone interview. “This class was the class that was most squeezed by the recession.”


It is confusing because the data reports 93 percent of 2010 graduates but the salary is reported for 2009? And then the year 2008 is mentioned?


NALP can get data from its employers too, and it does. It's not just the law schools.

sunynp wrote:Another question: how useful is the measure of national median for salary on individual decisions? I think more specific information would be helpful.


The info is useful but I'd have liked quartiles. The key phrase is "bimodal distribution." So on the end of the distribution with the $160K earners, there must have been many less this year than last year, to push the median down that far. That's what we know. That is further supported by other stats. NALP reported that firms with over 100 lawyers have drastically reduced openings, and these are the positions that would offer salaries on the high end of a bimodal distribution. That is what the information tells us: less big law jobs.

gens1tb
Posts: 315
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2010 1:36 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby gens1tb » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:03 pm

27% temp
11% part time

good lord

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby sunynp » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:08 pm

robotclubmember wrote:
sunynp wrote:Given the terrible reporting of data by law schools, which everyone knows exists, how reliable is this information in the article? Could there have been over-reporting from the schools? How reliable was the information for previous years?

Also from the article:
The national median starting salary at law firms dropped to $104,000 from $130,000 in 2009, reflecting a shift in the distribution of jobs and salary adjustments at some firms, the NALP said today. The report cited information submitted by 192 laws schools and covering 93 percent of 2010 graduates.
“This is in some ways the fallout of 2008,” NALP Executive Director James Leipold said in a phone interview. “This class was the class that was most squeezed by the recession.”


It is confusing because the data reports 93 percent of 2010 graduates but the salary is reported for 2009? And then the year 2008 is mentioned?


NALP can get data from its employers too, and it does. It's not just the law schools.


The bolded is why I asked about the law school reporting being used as the basis for the data in the report. I didn't see where the quoted article mentioned that NALP used data from firms.

I'm still confused about the years. How can the salary be reported from 2009 for 2010 graduates? The 2010 graduates were not working fulltime in 2009. And why is 2008 important - is that the year this class started law school?

It would be easier to read the report and not just the article, is the NALP report available or is it something you have to pay for? I couldn't find a link for the actual NALP report.
Last edited by sunynp on Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:14 pm

sunynp wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:
sunynp wrote:Given the terrible reporting of data by law schools, which everyone knows exists, how reliable is this information in the article? Could there have been over-reporting from the schools? How reliable was the information for previous years?

Also from the article:
The national median starting salary at law firms dropped to $104,000 from $130,000 in 2009, reflecting a shift in the distribution of jobs and salary adjustments at some firms, the NALP said today. The report cited information submitted by 192 laws schools and covering 93 percent of 2010 graduates.
“This is in some ways the fallout of 2008,” NALP Executive Director James Leipold said in a phone interview. “This class was the class that was most squeezed by the recession.”


It is confusing because the data reports 93 percent of 2010 graduates but the salary is reported for 2009? And then the year 2008 is mentioned?


NALP can get data from its employers too, and it does. It's not just the law schools.


The bolded is why I asked about the law school reporting. I didn't see where the article mentioned data from firms being used.

I'm still confused about the years. How can the salary be reported from 2009 for 2010 graduates? And why is 2008 important - is that the year this class started law school?

It would be easier to read the report and not just the article, is the NALP report available or is it something you have to pay for? I couldn't find a link for the actual NALP report.


I think you should read it again.

The national median starting salary at law firms dropped to $104,000 from $130,000 in 2009, reflecting a shift in the distribution of jobs and salary adjustments at some firms, the NALP said today. The report cited information submitted by 192 laws schools and covering 93 percent of 2010 graduates.

“This is in some ways the fallout of 2008,” NALP Executive Director James Leipold said in a phone interview. “This class was the class that was most squeezed by the recession.”


They are are describing a shift in salaries from 2009 ($130K) to 2010 ($104K). Then the NALP guy comments on the data by saying that it is a result of the financial meltdown of 2008, whose effects ore still being felt and from which we have clearly not recovered.

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:15 pm

As to the meat of this- this is a jobless recovery because this is a recession caused by overleveraging in the financial sector, which allowed companies to play fast and loose in general. Now companies are using their cash and profits to build reserves, while the financial sector deleverages, meaning that job growth won't catch up until the financial services stop deleveraging and begin lending in earnest.

Basically, we're fundamentally ok now, but no one is taking a risk by expanding until Europe settles down, greece gets bailed out, financial sector gets straightened out, and consumer appetite picks up. There- reality. Stop making crap up about a government conspiracy.


ROTFL! This country's best days are in the past, not the future. Oil is trending upwards again despite the reserves being released a couple weeks ago. Unemployment, if measured using honest methods and not the BS "birth-death model" and counting those unemployed for more than X months as invisible, we'd be looking at numbers about as gruesome as 1933-34, the darkest days of the Great Depression.

Check out Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente if you want to hear the truth about where we're headed. Unlike the Beltway-clowns you praise so highly, these gentlemen have a track record of being not only right, but far ahead of the other geeks when it comes to economic forecasting. I also recommend Bill Bonner's stuff.

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:20 pm

areyouinsane wrote:
As to the meat of this- this is a jobless recovery because this is a recession caused by overleveraging in the financial sector, which allowed companies to play fast and loose in general. Now companies are using their cash and profits to build reserves, while the financial sector deleverages, meaning that job growth won't catch up until the financial services stop deleveraging and begin lending in earnest.

Basically, we're fundamentally ok now, but no one is taking a risk by expanding until Europe settles down, greece gets bailed out, financial sector gets straightened out, and consumer appetite picks up. There- reality. Stop making crap up about a government conspiracy.


ROTFL! This country's best days are in the past, not the future. Oil is trending upwards again despite the reserves being released a couple weeks ago. Unemployment, if measured using honest methods and not the BS "birth-death model" and counting those unemployed for more than X months as invisible, we'd be looking at numbers about as gruesome as 1933-34, the darkest days of the Great Depression.

Check out Peter Schiff and Gerald Celente if you want to hear the truth about where we're headed. Unlike the Beltway-clowns you praise so highly, these gentlemen have a track record of being not only right, but far ahead of the other geeks when it comes to economic forecasting. I also recommend Bill Bonner's stuff.


Even BLS's own fine print acknowledges that 1 in 4 middle-aged males in this country aren't working right now. I was going to get more into this "basically, we're fundamentally ok now" thing, but it's so laughable.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby sunynp » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:26 pm

ok - now I am starting to get this. Even though the article doesn't cite law firm sources, the NALP report uses them. And the number for 2009 was 130,000 (which wasn't that a significant drop too?) Now for 2010, the number is 104,000.

But the class of 2009 still made more than the class of 2010 -even though the class of 2010 was a year further removed from the 2008 problems?

And I agree that a national median is not that helpful in measuring data which as we know can be localized in different markets and which has that odd bimodal distribution.

From the boards it seems that DC and California are really tough but that NYC remains better because of the number of law firm spots. But even in NYC the classes at biglaw are much smaller and remain that way - with some firms still deferring start dates. Yet, most of these firms are busy and just working with smaller staffs. I think that may be the lasting trend - how leanly can a deal be staffed and still get done.

I wonder if the actual reports makes any predictions for trends in hiring/salaries for the next few classes.

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby robotclubmember » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:28 pm

There are predictions out there, none so good. Oh, and ask areyouinsane how he feels about the NYC market, you may get some info that will blow your mind away.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:32 pm

"Listen, I'm going to be honest: things are very, very slow right now. None of the firms need anybody at the moment... Oh, when will things get better? I would say probably in October or November. Don't worry. I'll keep your resume on top of the pile."
- Co-worker on the phone at a legal temp. agency, Summer of 2008

Nope.jpg

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby sunynp » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:39 pm

oh wow I heart areyouinsane for his posts. I know he is trying to be helpful but I worry that he is making himself too identifiable. He may not care, but really he should protect his anonymity for his own sake down the road. He is a good writer with good experiences to draw upon. He adds the perspective of actual experience.
I don't know how many people will listen to him because everyone thinks it doesn't apply to them.
I have learned it is almost impossible to warn someone of danger. People who are good at school assume they will work hard and have a plan and excel in law school. They just don't get that no matter how smart they are and how hard they work - they can still end up in the bottom of the class.

My real concern for people is not that they shouldn't attempt to be lawyers in a crowded market - it is that the absurd cost for tuition makes it such a huge risk to take. If everyone who got accepted could attend for minimal cost, then I wouldn't be so concerned. I would never, under any circumstance go into 6 figures of debt that even with IBR programs I will have at least 10 years to repay - if not longer. And I think it is criminal that schools charge that much. There is no reason for the education to be so expensive. (Note: I am speaking only for myself, I do not judge people who make this choice. I am just way to conservative to do that. I would never call anyone who is trying to make a good decision for their future "stupid")

(please excuse the above off-topic post)

To bring it a little back to on-topic, I think NALP should do a mandatory survey and report on the level of debt that people face coming out of all these schools. I'm sure they have the ability to access that information as well. These salary numbers are still high compared to other fields, without showing how much debt students are in, the salary might still be misleading.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:48 pm

I wonder how many people still have to pay off their loans from UG.

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

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby areyouinsane » Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:58 pm

And I think it is criminal that schools charge that much. There is no reason for the education to be so expensive.


Oh there's a reason all right: it's because deans, admins and profs demand astronomical salary/compensation packages for a cupcake job. Just look at this vile pig from U of Maryland:

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... eturn_60k/

and

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2010-0 ... n-payments


360 K a year for a do-nothing, figurehead job. And this is at a state school! But that just wasn't enough: she had to scam extra $$$ for sabbaticals she never bothered to take! Kids, these are the kind of folks you want to hand your (borrowed) money over to? People who ruthlessly grub for every last nickle while scolding everyone to "give something back" and "do lots of pro-bono"!

And by comparison, her salary was peanuts. There are deans at private law schools making 600-800 K, and plenty of professors raking in 250-300 K for about 6 hours of work a week. It takes a dozen students paying full boat just to cover the annual salary of the average law school dean.

All of this is made possible by the student loan scam. The schools risk nothing: it's heads they win, tails you lose.

The entire system is a bubble that is only now finally starting to burst. They won't be able to hide the truth much longer. Tuition is simply out of control, and jobs are never coming back. What I paid sticker for a TTT in 2001-04 is what that school would now cost with a 60% ride.

These deans aren't stupid. They're gonna suck every dollar they can before the system finally collapses and their diploma mills become ghost towns. Since the profs are tenured it's impossible to cut their salaries, not to mention all the lavish, opulent facilities these dumps built in the 1990s and early 2000s, all financed by notes which assumed ever-rising tuition and perpetual waves of new enrollment. It's similar in nature to a Ponzi scheme, but like all Ponzis it will crumble when the quantity of new suckers dries up.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby sunynp » Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:23 am

ok! There is no legitimate financial reason for law school (and many undergrads) to be so expensive. As I said, I think it is criminal the way schools profit off the students while leaving the student fully at risk for the debt and the career for which the students are not adequately trained. Even worse are the schools that entice students with scholarships knowing the students will probably not keep those scholarships.

There was a post on the forum today about a student in Iowa who had been promised an RA that never materialized. How dishonest was that school in using that RA position to convince a student to enroll. Luckily the student refused to go there without the RA in-state tuition.

again off-topic but I don't think you can talk about salary without talking about corresponding debt levels. I think for a vast majority of people a median salary at 104,000 still sounds like a fortune. Even if it is a huge 20% drop from the year before, that is still a large salary. Without a scale showing how much debt these students have, the salary can seem very enticing.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby prezidentv8 » Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:33 am

sunynp wrote: legitimate


I love that its come to the point where we need to clarify this.

Discuss.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby sunynp » Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:44 am

My point is that law school is too expensive. areyouinsane explained the salaries that people are paid and that helps drive up the cost of tuition. I'm sure law school is a partial cash cow for many schools.

My only way of relating the expense of law school back to the OP: salary reports of 20% decrease alone are incomplete financial information about the situations of 2010 grads. The huge amount of debt they have taken on to finance their career should be reported as well.

If other people want to discuss why law school costs what it does, that is fine with me. I never intended it to be a main point in a thread about an article showing the national mean salary dropped 20% from 2009 to 2010. The reason for that drop is primarily the decline of biglaw spots. Many people want biglaw to repay their law school debt. ( So then we get back to the tuition being too expensive. imho)

columbia86
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 11:59 am

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby columbia86 » Fri Jul 15, 2011 12:54 am

pattonthicke wrote:Just went through the whole thread and am a bit confused as to why op gives a fuck about other ppl's decision to go to law school. Also, confused, why op assumes that non t14ers are just ignorant little shits who dont have access to the internet and cant clearly see that the legal sector is shit. As a non t14er myself, i know its ugly. I know i need big law to pay off my debt, and only have a 5% chance at it. I can read MOTHERFUCKER!!! I know that I probably wont be that special little snowflake that actually gets big law. I know when i graduate i will be deep in debt with little chance of paying it off before i die. But guess what, maybe i dont care. Why you ask, do i go to law school anyway? In the spirit of Gov Chris Cristie, its none of your business why i decide to go to law school!!!! I dont ask you, so dont ask me.


Lool.

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby scammedhard » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:07 am

pattonthicke wrote:Just went through the whole thread and am a bit confused as to why op gives a fuck about other ppl's decision to go to law school. Also, confused, why op assumes that non t14ers are just ignorant little shits who dont have access to the internet and cant clearly see that the legal sector is shit. As a non t14er myself, i know its ugly. I know i need big law to pay off my debt, and only have a 5% chance at it. I can read MOTHERFUCKER!!! I know that I probably wont be that special little snowflake that actually gets big law. I know when i graduate i will be deep in debt with little chance of paying it off before i die. But guess what, maybe i dont care. Why you ask, do i go to law school anyway? In the spirit of Gov Chris Cristie, its none of your business why i decide to go to law school!!!! I dont ask you, so dont ask me.

You are going to law school by borrowing money from taxpayers. If you cannot pay back, taxpayers will lose. If you seek debt relief (in the form of IBR or other programs), it's taxpayers money. All taxpayers have the right to question these programs and decisions because it's their money as well.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:10 am

Well, the schools gotta find some way to keep their professors. Though I wish they didn't act so pious all the time.

Anyone else considering academia at this point?

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby scammedhard » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:13 am

SchopenhauerFTW wrote:Anyone else considering academia at this point?

Yeah. I plan to open a TTTTT; it's a sure way to make money.

SchopenhauerFTW
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby SchopenhauerFTW » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:19 am

scammedhard wrote:
SchopenhauerFTW wrote:Anyone else considering academia at this point?

Yeah. I plan to open a TTTTT; it's a sure way to make money.

You'll only be able to pull it off if schools like Cooley and Thomas Jefferson come out on the right side of their respective cases. Otherwise the ABA may come down on you hard. You might want to consider opening it in California. I think there are over thirty schools that are not approved by the ABA there.

shoeshine
Posts: 1241
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 10:58 pm

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby shoeshine » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:25 am

Law is TTT. I am going to be a Realtor like Ken. After I sell my first 100 million dollar home, things should come pretty easy.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby prezidentv8 » Fri Jul 15, 2011 1:40 am

shoeshine wrote:Law is TTT. I am going to be a Realtor like Ken. After I sell my first 100 million dollar home, things should come pretty easy.


Honestly, it seems like a pretty fun career path.

witorres89
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 12:34 am

Re: Law School Class of 2010 Starting Pay Fell 20% as Jobs Erode

Postby witorres89 » Fri Jul 15, 2011 3:42 am

ITT people who don't have degrees in economics argue about what is a recession.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 4 guests