JD Unemployment Reaches New High (15%) Forum

[mike0331]

Statistics are fun because generally they suck for making an argument because they provide little information, miss various factors, are not properly representative, etc. It's anecdotal, sure, I get that. The point I was trying to make is you set your own path. Focus less on the "JD unemployment" and more on what you will need to do to not fall into that statistic. It isn't a tossup, those who are employed all across the spectrum have almost certainly taken steps to get to where they are. Some will take those steps, some won't.

Mike

[prezidentv8]

Maybe it's just the people I associate with... but I have two friends doing well and enjoying their work out of a school that most on this site would scoff at people attending. That's 2/2 of the people in my age group who have recently attended law school who are happily and gainfully employed. Neither are in "big law" FWIW.

I have no aspirations for being in anything more than a medium to small firm... maybe I'm way off the mark, but those I know who are still very intimately involved in the industry say it is not unrealistic.

Mike

oh what a sample size.

oh, what a scholar!

[lacrossebrother]

Statistics are fun because generally they suck for making an argument because they provide little information, miss various factors, are not properly representative, etc. It's anecdotal, sure, I get that. The point I was trying to make is you set your own path. Focus less on the "JD unemployment" and more on what you will need to do to not fall into that statistic. It isn't a tossup, those who are employed all across the spectrum have almost certainly taken steps to get to where they are. Some will take those steps, some won't.

Mike

I agree with this. But the other thing is that three can keep a secret, if two are dead. Life is full of wonderment, and you really need to make sure you seize the opportunities that are presented to you, but you also need to realize that sometimes, you need to make your own opportunities. If you just look at statistics all the time, you'll realize, 100% of people die. That can't stop you from trying to live forever. Or at least, live life to its fullest. If you focus on "death," you will surely miss out on what's more important, at least in my opinion --"life." In other words, everyone here can feel free to be as pessimistic as they want, and talk about this stat that they heard about, or this guy that they talked to, but all you can really make decisions based on is your ambition. Sure, you can trade your ambition for $10/hr at the local whole foods, and you might even meet some cute girls doing it and actually get a chance to participate in a movement that's making the world a little healthier. With that said, if everyone took that path, we might not have Whole Foods. Or electric cars.

[fats provolone]

Statistics are fun because generally they suck for making an argument because they provide little information, miss various factors, are not properly representative, etc. It's anecdotal, sure, I get that. The point I was trying to make is you set your own path. Focus less on the "JD unemployment" and more on what you will need to do to not fall into that statistic. It isn't a tossup, those who are employed all across the spectrum have almost certainly taken steps to get to where they are. Some will take those steps, some won't.

Mike

but see luck, bad

[georgej]

Statistics are fun because generally they suck for making an argument because they provide little information, miss various factors, are not properly representative, etc. It's anecdotal, sure, I get that. The point I was trying to make is you set your own path. Focus less on the "JD unemployment" and more on what you will need to do to not fall into that statistic. It isn't a tossup, those who are employed all across the spectrum have almost certainly taken steps to get to where they are. Some will take those steps, some won't.

Mike

I agree with this. But the other thing is that three can keep a secret, if two are dead. Life is full of wonderment, and you really need to make sure you seize the opportunities that are presented to you, but you also need to realize that sometimes, you need to make your own opportunities. If you just look at statistics all the time, you'll realize, 100% of people die. That can't stop you from trying to live forever. Or at least, live life to its fullest. If you focus on "death," you will surely miss out on what's more important, at least in my opinion --"life." In other words, everyone here can feel free to be as pessimistic as they want, and talk about this stat that they heard about, or this guy that they talked to, but all you can really make decisions based on is your ambition. Sure, you can trade your ambition for $10/hr at the local whole foods, and you might even meet some cute girls doing it and actually get a chance to participate in a movement that's making the world a little healthier. With that said, if everyone took that path, we might not have Whole Foods. Or electric cars.

if you doubt your power you give power to your doubt amirite?

[baal hadad]

The point I was trying to make is you set your own path.

lol

[PeanutsNJam]

They should offer statistics for T1/T20/T14 instead. Including TT/TTT/TTTT in the data just skews it towards the sewers, and I don't think TLS is concerned with those schools.

The aggregate outcomes are probably better for T1 and up.

[lacrossebrother]

The aggregate outcomes are probably better for T1 and up.

I mean, that's your opinion, but without stats, I agree we can't know if T1 outcomes are better in the aggregate than the lesser tiers

[AReasonableMan]

They should offer statistics for T1/T20/T14 instead. Including TT/TTT/TTTT in the data just skews it towards the sewers, and I don't think TLS is concerned with those schools.

The aggregate outcomes are probably better for T1 and up.

this is the total unemployment percentage, not only new grads. considering firm hiring has improved, all other legal emoloyment must have declined.

[84651846190]

Maybe it's just the people I associate with... but I have two friends doing well and enjoying their work out of a school that most on this site would scoff at people attending. That's 2/2 of the people in my age group who have recently attended law school who are happily and gainfully employed. Neither are in "big law" FWIW.

I have no aspirations for being in anything more than a medium to small firm... maybe I'm way off the mark, but those I know who are still very intimately involved in the industry say it is not unrealistic.

Mike

[JCougar]

If I had a quarter for every mid-life lawyer I met that was just barely grinding by as a solo/at a 3-person firm, 20 years after school, I'd have no school debt myself.

This profession is pretty clearly biglaw or bust, and even at that, biglaw is a pyramid scheme that will bounce you out after 5 years, if you're lucky and sane enough to even last that long.

This is just way overblown. Biglaw or bust is dumb. Biglaw is one of the worst outcomes from law school. It eats your soul and leaves you divorced paying half of your money to the government in taxes and the other half to ex-spouses and loans. The ideal outcomes from law school are government and eventually solo shopping. More biglaw attorneys voluntarily leave to open their own shops than continue in the bullshittery that is biglaw.

Especially NYC biglaw.

Yeah, I realize this, but the only field that hires a lot of entry-levels is Biglaw. No one else can pay to train you. Trying to go small practice straight out of law school is difficult, unless you found a firm to clerk for during law school that is willing to teach you how to be a lawyer. If you strike out at OCI, this is the #1 smartest thing to do.

Hopefully, your law school is generous enough to let you take a semester or two "in practice" so you can teach yourself how to actually be a lawyer and get clinic credit for it. If that sounds ironic, it's because it is. You will be paying your law school for the privilege of working somewhere else to learn how to practice law.

But yes, this does make a huge difference to small law firms and government jobs. They need to be able to trust that you can manage a case from the get-go--otherwise, they're better off doing the extra work and handling it themselves. There's no time or money to spoon-feed you the ins and outs of litigation.

Reminds me of the Monty Python sketch: The Four Yorkshiremen. "When I was young, we had it tough. We had to work 25 hours a day and pay the mill owner for permission to come to work." Well, that's not so much as comedy as it is reality. Making law schools more "practice oriented" with these clinics is really just paying the law school for permission to come to work. It exposes the true folly of the uselessness of legal "education."

[AReasonableMan]

Unless the market regains 2008 prominence, this figure is going to keep going up. More grads are employed now, but many wind up unemployed and you still have all the post 2008 unemployed grads. Yes, some of them rebound but many don't. I don't see why this is news.

[JCougar]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/02/06/leg ... od=WSJBlog



So the legal industry is shrinking again...rather than rebounding. In fact, it's almost as bad today as it was in the aftermath of 2008.

[bearsfan23]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2015/02/06/leg ... od=WSJBlog



So the legal industry is shrinking again...rather than rebounding. In fact, it's almost as bad today as it was in the aftermath of 2008.

Actually that shows the legal market has been very steady since the 2008 crash.

But whatever, keep going with the whole "sky is falling" thing

[JCougar]

Actually that shows the legal market has been very steady since the 2008 crash.

And that's a good thing?

At best, this shows that 2008 was a faceplant rather than the low point of a bounce. But if the legal sector continues to shrink, in 5 years, people will look back on 2008 as the glory days.

[15 styx]

Maybe I am missing something. 35 JD grads for every 20 openings, how is it that the percentage of unemployed is only 15%? The numbers don’t add up. Granted everyone I know is employed (except for a friend axed a month ago and is still looking).

[prezidentv8]

Maybe I am missing something. 35 JD grads for every 20 openings, how is it that the percentage of unemployed is only 15%? The numbers don’t add up. Granted everyone I know is employed (except for a friend axed a month ago and is still looking).

non-legal employment, presumably. most everyone with a jd is at least minimally literate, so i guess that shouldn't be surprising. but still, compare that 15% to the overall unemployment rate.

[JCougar]

Maybe I am missing something. 35 JD grads for every 20 openings, how is it that the percentage of unemployed is only 15%? The numbers don’t add up. Granted everyone I know is employed (except for a friend axed a month ago and is still looking).

Yeah, I would guess non-legal jobs, temp/part time jobs, volunteer jobs, etc. That probably covers the 30% between the 15% totally unemployed versus the ~55% in long-term, full-time lawyer jobs.

[lacrossebrother]

Why would we want more lawyers? How would 2008 be the glory days? It's awesome that our profession is becoming more exclusive.

[15 styx]

It would be ideal if there was a 1:1 ratio between openings and candidates but I do not see how this is conceivable with 200 law schools pumping out JDs. For those who exited OCI with a solid job, life is all rainbows but as my recently terminated friend is discovering, trying to rebound into a comparable position is challenging.

[AReasonableMan]

Maybe I am missing something. 35 JD grads for every 20 openings, how is it that the percentage of unemployed is only 15%? The numbers don’t add up. Granted everyone I know is employed (except for a friend axed a month ago and is still looking).

Yeah, I would guess non-legal jobs, temp/part time jobs, volunteer jobs, etc. That probably covers the 30% between the 15% totally unemployed versus the ~55% in long-term, full-time lawyer jobs.

Just to be clear this chart is based on the number of all jobs in the legal industry. If no lawyers were fired and 1 additional lawyer hired while 2 secretaries were laid off the chart would conclude there was a reduction in legal jobs despite a rise in the number of lawyer jobs.

[pantsuitchic]

Also, there's a special kind of disqualification in the legal industry when you have a J.D.. Being a paralegal. If you're a lawyer drafting a brief, do you really want a paralegal with a J.D. in your office? Will that person follow orders or will they more likely to substitute their judgment for your judgment.

False. I work at a top ten firm and the paralegal who works with the appellate group is required to have a JD. And another paralegal has one as well.

[JCougar]

Just to be clear this chart specifies all legal jobs. If no lawyers were fired and 1 additional lawyer hired while 2 secretaries were laid off the chart would conclude there was a reduction in legal jobs. It's very relevant as a broad statistical measure, but the data on this chart isn't necessarily useful for any specific type of job.

But like I said, a reasonable man would conclude that employment rates across these job types is more likely to be positively correlated than negatively correlated.

You're the one attempting to assert the theory here that is more of a reach. I'd be interested to hear more details as to why one should have any reason to believe it.

[AReasonableMan]

Just to be clear this chart specifies all legal jobs. If no lawyers were fired and 1 additional lawyer hired while 2 secretaries were laid off the chart would conclude there was a reduction in legal jobs. It's very relevant as a broad statistical measure, but the data on this chart isn't necessarily useful for any specific type of job.

But like I said, a reasonable man would conclude that employment rates across these job types is more likely to be positively correlated than negatively correlated.

You're the one attempting to assert the theory here that is more of a reach. I'd be interested to hear more details as to why one should have any reason to believe it.

I'm not making that argument, just pointing out. Elsewhere, I showed you there's currently a negative correlation between big law jobs and small firm jobs in te ABA link. Obviously if total hiring is down but big law hiring is up then everything other than big law is collectively even worse than you suggested. Just because I'm picking out something you probably should have clarified doesn't mean I disagree with you.

[JCougar]

I'm not making that argument, just pointing out. Elsewhere, I showed you there's currently a negative correlation between big law jobs and small firm jobs in te ABA link. Obviously if total hiring is down but big law hiring is up then everything other than big law is collectively even worse than you suggested. Just because I'm picking out something you probably should have clarified doesn't mean I disagree with you.

Why should I have clarified something that is merely speculation? If everyone was required to clarify every possible speculation about every possible tangent to what they were saying, communication would be nearly impossible.

If anything, the anecdotal evidence is telling us that clients are getting more and more picky about the rote busywork that gets billed to first- and second-year associates, etc. This would suggest that paralegals would be given more of this kind of work if possible (making binders, etc.)--rather than the other way around.