What are the job prospects at lower t-14 schools in the new.

[Geon]

Since you use Northwestern as an example: the school publishes quite detailed salary statistics: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/career/statistics/

For C/O 2011, which had 287 graduates:

126 (44%) reported a salary of $160k+
45 (16%) reported a salary of $100k-$160k.

Of the rest (note that this group is disjoint from the previous group since none of these jobs pay $100k+):
23 (8%) got a federal clerkship (these folks could have gotten big law)
13 (5%) got government or public interest (these people mostly could have gotten big law)

So I think Desert Fox's 75% figure is pretty on-point. Note the data is from 2011, at the depth of the recession. C/O 2012 and C/O 2013 have been substantially better nation-wide, but I don't think Northwestern improved very much, because it got hit a lot less hard in 2011 than many of the other lower-T14.

As for the comment about what the rest do--it really is highly bi-modal. I'm in the 3L class, and people who didn't get big law or a clerkship are having trouble.

In the 2011 data, 14% of the class did not have a permanent, full-time position after 9 months. Another 7% of the class ended up taking a small-firm job (< 50 attorneys). While some small firms pay decent money, I think it's safe to say that most people in this category are not. The salary reporting statistics tell the story. 64% of the class ended up at firms. For the 89% of them that ended up at firms > 50 attorneys, the salary reporting rate was 98%. For the other 11%, it was 50%. People making low salaries are dramatically less likely to report, and that's very obvious here.

So once you add up the people who got big law, a clerkship, or a public interest/government job, along with the people who don't have permanent, full-time work, and the people working at small firms for (probably) low pay, you've accounted for nearly the whole class.

Thanks, this was the kind of comprehensive response I was hoping for. I just wasn't sure how much I could believe the numbers they were publishing. What school are you at if you don't mind me asking?

I also was unsure how to view government and PI jobs. Are these just people who couldn't get in elsewhere or are they the opposite, because government jobs (in Canada) are just as if not more competitive in general than private sector jobs.

So what kind of money are the under 50 attorneys students making after grad.

[rayiner]

Since you use Northwestern as an example: the school publishes quite detailed salary statistics: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/career/statistics/

For C/O 2011, which had 287 graduates:

126 (44%) reported a salary of $160k+
45 (16%) reported a salary of $100k-$160k.

Of the rest (note that this group is disjoint from the previous group since none of these jobs pay $100k+):
23 (8%) got a federal clerkship (these folks could have gotten big law)
13 (5%) got government or public interest (these people mostly could have gotten big law)

So I think Desert Fox's 75% figure is pretty on-point. Note the data is from 2011, at the depth of the recession. C/O 2012 and C/O 2013 have been substantially better nation-wide, but I don't think Northwestern improved very much, because it got hit a lot less hard in 2011 than many of the other lower-T14.

As for the comment about what the rest do--it really is highly bi-modal. I'm in the 3L class, and people who didn't get big law or a clerkship are having trouble.

In the 2011 data, 14% of the class did not have a permanent, full-time position after 9 months. Another 7% of the class ended up taking a small-firm job (< 50 attorneys). While some small firms pay decent money, I think it's safe to say that most people in this category are not. The salary reporting statistics tell the story. 64% of the class ended up at firms. For the 89% of them that ended up at firms > 50 attorneys, the salary reporting rate was 98%. For the other 11%, it was 50%. People making low salaries are dramatically less likely to report, and that's very obvious here.

So once you add up the people who got big law, a clerkship, or a public interest/government job, along with the people who don't have permanent, full-time work, and the people working at small firms for (probably) low pay, you've accounted for nearly the whole class.

Thanks, this was the kind of comprehensive response I was hoping for. I just wasn't sure how much I could believe the numbers they were publishing. What school are you at if you don't mind me asking?

I also was unsure how to view government and PI jobs. Are these just people who couldn't get in elsewhere or are they the opposite, because government jobs (in Canada) are just as if not more competitive in general than private sector jobs.

So what kind of money are the under 50 attorneys students making after grad.

I'm a 3L at Northwestern and the data seems consistent with my anecdotal experience. You should be able to trust these numbers. They are reported by the school from data collected from students, but as of March of this year the reporting format is part of the ABA accreditation standards. The new ABA format requires much more detailed disclosures, such as part-time versus full-time status, that make it difficult to be sneaky with how it is presented. Also, at least NU and Penn's 2011 data is within 1% of the NLJ's data (http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2543436520) which is reported independently by law firms to the NLJ.

Most of the people I know at Northwestern who got government/PI jobs could have gotten big law. Things like public defender jobs are tremendously difficult to get, even though they pay only $45k/year. They are also eligible for 10-year loan forgiveness from the Federal government, as well as a pretty generous school loan repayment policy, which makes them desirable. Federal government jobs here in the US are even harder to get than jobs at big firms paying $160k.

The under 50 attorney category is difficult to pin down. In New York or Chicago probably $65-$75k: http://www.nalp.org/reported_salaries_by_city

[Geon]

But its more like 90k-80k for the top 10%. UF has a MEDIAN of 92k for private sector based off. Top 75% 115k.
http://www.top-law-schools.com/uf-college-of-law.html

That's median should be taken with a grain of salt. --LinkRemoved--

Only the 250-500 and 500+ attorney firm categories have a median of > $80k, and that median is based on 20 salaries (out of 408 people in the class). The true median should fall in the "11-25 attorney" firm size range, since 99 of 184 students in the private sector are at a firm of 25 attorneys or smaller. The median for that category is $65k.

Ok, new stats.

Anyhow, here is the gist of the matter. U of T's own salary stats show well

The Career Development Office compiles current information on articling and associate salaries and makes this available to our students.

Articling salaries in Toronto range from approximately $35,000 to $70,000 per year.
Students who article with a mid- to large-size Toronto law firm earns about $50,000 to $65,000 a year.
Articling salaries outside of Toronto, and in particular, outside of Ontario are lower.
A good source for information is the June 2004 edition of Canadian Lawyer magazine (available at most law libraries). The magazine's national compensation survey reports that:

the national mid-range for an articling student is $57,110 to $64,970.
the national mid-range average for first-year associate salaries is between $74,630 and $92,330.
the mid-range average for first-year lawyers in Ontario is $56,500 to $99,270.
The Career Development Office also compiles current information on articling and associate salaries and makes this available to our students.
--LinkRemoved-- is the salary range for new lawyers?#What is the salary range for new lawyers?#What is the salary range for new lawyers?

So a first year U of T grad is articling where his USA counter part is full time employed with a real job. U of T's range for first year employment was 70 on the HIGH END. So a first year grad from a Canadian law school from the best law school is making 70k. Whats MORE troubling is that in this same year they claimed to have placed 13% of their class in New York firms (2009). So the firms that are hiring U of T grads in New York are not only not paying them big law salaries but they are paying them New York City minimum wage at best (70 k won't go very far there). Canadian "first year salaries" are really 2nd year salaries, and as I pointed out the increases are larger in the US as well. but even if we pretend they really are first year after a 10 month articling period then the pay still sucks, even if you make it to the US, your firm will still be crummy despite placing in the top 10% of class. And the people at U of T Law are no idiots, they are gonna be smart, work hard, most of them could have gotten into t-14s if not t-6s and work like dogs. In the end what you get is a raw deal. As one financially would be better off finishing in the top 10% at any given US tier 2 law school and get paid the 160k instead of being ripped off to work for cheap in the most expensive city.

But what is worse is that some U of T grads are spending 135k to get a 35k salary which is almost as bad as what some gulc people who get screwed end up with.

Now I think I have shown that UF a tier 2 school in the deep south, is basically better or at least an equal decision to choose U of T for IN-STATE residents of U of T. But guess what. U of T international students are paying 34k in tuition, more than florida, to get a worse job.

So no, U of T is not like a T-14, its not a t-20, its not even equivalent of a US Tier 1 or Tier 2. Maybe a lower tier 2, but even those in the top 10% of Buffalo are better off than their U of T counter parts.


There are 2 shining lights in the Canadian system
1. Average Canadian lawyer between 44-47 earns in 200k+ range.
2. Canadian Judges earn quiet a bit more than their US counterparts. Ie. a justice on the provincial level can out earn US chief justice supreme court judges.
And thats it.

[Geon]

Since you use Northwestern as an example: the school publishes quite detailed salary statistics: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/career/statistics/

For C/O 2011, which had 287 graduates:

126 (44%) reported a salary of $160k+
45 (16%) reported a salary of $100k-$160k.

Of the rest (note that this group is disjoint from the previous group since none of these jobs pay $100k+):
23 (8%) got a federal clerkship (these folks could have gotten big law)
13 (5%) got government or public interest (these people mostly could have gotten big law)

So I think Desert Fox's 75% figure is pretty on-point. Note the data is from 2011, at the depth of the recession. C/O 2012 and C/O 2013 have been substantially better nation-wide, but I don't think Northwestern improved very much, because it got hit a lot less hard in 2011 than many of the other lower-T14.

As for the comment about what the rest do--it really is highly bi-modal. I'm in the 3L class, and people who didn't get big law or a clerkship are having trouble.

In the 2011 data, 14% of the class did not have a permanent, full-time position after 9 months. Another 7% of the class ended up taking a small-firm job (< 50 attorneys). While some small firms pay decent money, I think it's safe to say that most people in this category are not. The salary reporting statistics tell the story. 64% of the class ended up at firms. For the 89% of them that ended up at firms > 50 attorneys, the salary reporting rate was 98%. For the other 11%, it was 50%. People making low salaries are dramatically less likely to report, and that's very obvious here.

So once you add up the people who got big law, a clerkship, or a public interest/government job, along with the people who don't have permanent, full-time work, and the people working at small firms for (probably) low pay, you've accounted for nearly the whole class.

Thanks, this was the kind of comprehensive response I was hoping for. I just wasn't sure how much I could believe the numbers they were publishing. What school are you at if you don't mind me asking?

I also was unsure how to view government and PI jobs. Are these just people who couldn't get in elsewhere or are they the opposite, because government jobs (in Canada) are just as if not more competitive in general than private sector jobs.

So what kind of money are the under 50 attorneys students making after grad.

I'm a 3L at Northwestern and the data seems consistent with my anecdotal experience. You should be able to trust these numbers. They are reported by the school from data collected from students, but as of March of this year the reporting format is part of the ABA accreditation standards. The new ABA format requires much more detailed disclosures, such as part-time versus full-time status, that make it difficult to be sneaky with how it is presented. Also, at least NU and Penn's 2011 data is within 1% of the NLJ's data (http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNL ... 2543436520) which is reported independently by law firms to the NLJ.

Most of the people I know at Northwestern who got government/PI jobs could have gotten big law. Things like public defender jobs are tremendously difficult to get, even though they pay only $45k/year. They are also eligible for 10-year loan forgiveness from the Federal government, as well as a pretty generous school loan repayment policy, which makes them desirable. Federal government jobs here in the US are even harder to get than jobs at big firms paying $160k.

The under 50 attorney category is difficult to pin down. In New York or Chicago probably $65-$75k: http://www.nalp.org/reported_salaries_by_city

So how much out of pocket did you end up paying yearly for NU? Would you say it is worth it?

[rayiner]

So how much out of pocket did you end up paying yearly for NU? Would you say it is worth it?

About $70k/year out of pocket. Worth it? Who knows, depends on how long I last in big law.

[drbarry987]

How are things at NYU? I think some other schools have released 2011 placement percentages but I didn't hear anything about how NYU did during this past fall's EIW. And info, DF?

[Anonymous User]

2L @ Duke

It seems like everyone in my class got biglaw unless they had poor interview skills, bad grades, or were inflexible about the market they were looking in

[Anonymous User]

What do you consider bad grades-bottom 15%?

[Anonymous User]

How are things at NYU? I think some other schools have released 2011 placement percentages but I didn't hear anything about how NYU did during this past fall's EIW. And info, DF?

Offerless 2L here. But NYU tells me things went really well. How exciting.

2L @ Duke

It seems like everyone in my class got biglaw unless they had poor interview skills, bad grades, or were inflexible about the market they were looking in

I'm not at Duke, but I hear this repeated like a mantra, and I think it's nonsense. People use it to avoid admitting the significant amount of chance that goes into hiring decisions after 20 minute interviews.

[Julio_El_Chavo]

What do you consider bad grades-bottom 15%?

Anything below a 3.0 at UVA is no bueno (around the bottom 10-15%). I know a couple of people in this category and they all either got non-biglaw jobs through connections or are looking for work.

[Julio_El_Chavo]

2L @ Duke

It seems like everyone in my class got biglaw unless they had poor interview skills, bad grades, or were inflexible about the market they were looking in

Considering that even the #1 dudes grade-wise have literally no idea why they get dinged at some firms, it's fair to say that you can strike out because of bad luck alone.

[09042014]

2L @ Duke

It seems like everyone in my class got biglaw unless they had poor interview skills, bad grades, or were inflexible about the market they were looking in

Considering that even the #1 dudes grade-wise have literally no idea why they get dinged at some firms, it's fair to say that you can strike out because of bad luck alone.

You can minimize the chance of that by hustling at OCI and mass mailing. But it still exists.

[keg411]

2L @ Duke

It seems like everyone in my class got biglaw unless they had poor interview skills, bad grades, or were inflexible about the market they were looking in

Considering that even the #1 dudes grade-wise have literally no idea why they get dinged at some firms, it's fair to say that you can strike out because of bad luck alone.

I'd agree with this to an extent. But I do think the more proactive you are, the less likely this will happen. Again, I'm really really going to stress mass mailing in late July/early August/before OCI. Especially your regional market hometown if you're from a T14. Will some people not need it and breeze through OCI and have to cancel callbacks? Yes, but no one should take that risk.

[rayiner]

The overall decent placement at the T14 masks the underlying issue that for a big portion of the class, it's 3 callbacks -> 1 offer. That just creates a lot of randomness in the process that didn't used to exist.

[drbarry987]

How are things at NYU? I think some other schools have released 2011 placement percentages but I didn't hear anything about how NYU did during this past fall's EIW. And info, DF?

Offerless 2L here. But NYU tells me things went really well. How exciting.

Sucks man. Keep hustling and good luck (Srs). How were ur grades? Did you bid mostly NYC?

[keg411]

The overall decent placement at the T14 masks the underlying issue that for a big portion of the class, it's 3 callbacks -> 1 offer. That just creates a lot of randomness in the process that didn't used to exist.

IMO, this is the reason you don't stop contacting firms or following up with firms until you are offer-secure. Almost everyone I know who struck out stopped being proactive after OCI, and the other people I know who initially struggled got jobs (and at major-market Vault firms at that) because they kept pushing. The absolute most important thing about OCI/job fairs/mass mailing is to get as many possible interviews/CB's as possible to eliminate the randomness.

[Geon]

So how much out of pocket did you end up paying yearly for NU? Would you say it is worth it?

About $70k/year out of pocket. Worth it? Who knows, depends on how long I last in big law.

Wait you paid 70k a year , or 70k over 3 years. I'd guess I'd pay that money if I had it too, but damn, the banks up here won't even lend that to us. Where did your cha ching come from, loans, rich parents, work?

My long term goal is to relocate to US anyways, I just wonder if it is better to start off in Canada then transition to the US when I have enough $$$ or to just borrow and try to get in a t-14 and land hopefully a good job... actually any job really will do.

[bk1]

Wait you paid 70k a year , or 70k over 3 years. I'd guess I'd pay that money if I had it too, but damn, the banks up here won't even lend that to us. Where did your cha ching come from, loans, rich parents, work?

Private law schools in the US (including cost of living) cost over $70k/year. Heck even some of the public law schools cost this much (Cal, UMich, UVA, UCLA). Northwestern for 2012-2013 will be something like $77k. The fed gov loans any US citizen up to the full cost of attendance if they wish.

[094320]

..

[LawIdiot86]

The overall decent placement at the T14 masks the underlying issue that for a big portion of the class, it's 3 callbacks -> 1 offer. That just creates a lot of randomness in the process that didn't used to exist.

IMO, this is the reason you don't stop contacting firms or following up with firms until you are offer-secure. Almost everyone I know who struck out stopped being proactive after OCI, and the other people I know who initially struggled got jobs (and at major-market Vault firms at that) because they kept pushing. The absolute most important thing about OCI/job fairs/mass mailing is to get as many possible interviews/CB's as possible to eliminate the randomness.

+1 Maxing out the screeners by mailing, fairs, re-mailing, OCI, OCI suites, and even cold calling alums, will maximize your odds. I know a good number of people with decent grades but poor interview skills who lost out by not pushing hard enough for every last interview.

[rayiner]

The overall decent placement at the T14 masks the underlying issue that for a big portion of the class, it's 3 callbacks -> 1 offer. That just creates a lot of randomness in the process that didn't used to exist.

IMO, this is the reason you don't stop contacting firms or following up with firms until you are offer-secure. Almost everyone I know who struck out stopped being proactive after OCI, and the other people I know who initially struggled got jobs (and at major-market Vault firms at that) because they kept pushing. The absolute most important thing about OCI/job fairs/mass mailing is to get as many possible interviews/CB's as possible to eliminate the randomness.

+1 Maxing out the screeners by mailing, fairs, re-mailing, OCI, OCI suites, and even cold calling alums, will maximize your odds. I know a good number of people with decent grades but poor interview skills who lost out by not pushing hard enough for every last interview.

I don't disagree that what you and keg said is true. However, I think "2L @ Duke" is unfairly characterizing the people who didn't get jobs. There is some ground between "maxing out screeners by mailing and re-mailing" and "having poor interview skills, bad grades, or [being] inflexible about.. market."

If you were a guy in the bottom third, but not the very bottom, who was an average interviewer, but not memorable, and applied in Virginia, DC, and Maryland to stay near family, you might very well have struck out. But I don't think he meets "2L @ Duke's" characterization.

[LawIdiot86]

The overall decent placement at the T14 masks the underlying issue that for a big portion of the class, it's 3 callbacks -> 1 offer. That just creates a lot of randomness in the process that didn't used to exist.

IMO, this is the reason you don't stop contacting firms or following up with firms until you are offer-secure. Almost everyone I know who struck out stopped being proactive after OCI, and the other people I know who initially struggled got jobs (and at major-market Vault firms at that) because they kept pushing. The absolute most important thing about OCI/job fairs/mass mailing is to get as many possible interviews/CB's as possible to eliminate the randomness.

+1 Maxing out the screeners by mailing, fairs, re-mailing, OCI, OCI suites, and even cold calling alums, will maximize your odds. I know a good number of people with decent grades but poor interview skills who lost out by not pushing hard enough for every last interview.

I don't disagree that what you and keg said is true. However, I think "2L @ Duke" is unfairly characterizing the people who didn't get jobs. There is some ground between "maxing out screeners by mailing and re-mailing" and "having poor interview skills, bad grades, or [being] inflexible about.. market."

If you were a guy in the bottom third, but not the very bottom, who was an average interviewer, but not memorable, and applied in Virginia, DC, and Maryland to stay near family, you might very well have struck out. But I don't think he meets "2L @ Duke's" characterization.

I would agree 2L @ Duke is a bit too broad. At some point (below 3.2/3.1) grades are just too low and no amount of effort/personality will help. Also, poor interview skills can sink even a good candidate, but having enough interviews to burn some early in the process by working the kinks out helps; that's what worked for me. Being inflexible about market/practice is a real killer though. If you only mail certain firms in certain markets during the sweet spot, there is no recovery later on.

[rayiner]

Being inflexible about market/practice is a real killer though. If you only mail certain firms in certain markets during the sweet spot, there is no recovery later on.

I agree, and to us hardened TLS gunners that makes complete sense. But it's completely alien to a lot of our classmates, and reasonable-so. You can be a diligent job searcher without perceiving the need to apply far and wide, away from family, friends, and significant others. Especially in, as you put it, the sweet spot. Even people who came to that realization sometimes do so too late.

[LawIdiot86]

Being inflexible about market/practice is a real killer though. If you only mail certain firms in certain markets during the sweet spot, there is no recovery later on.

I agree, and to us hardened TLS gunners that makes complete sense. But it's completely alien to a lot of our classmates, and reasonable-so. You can be a diligent job searcher without perceiving the need to apply far and wide, away from family, friends, and significant others. Especially in, as you put it, the sweet spot. Even people who came to that realization sometimes do so too late.

I know. I was a year late and managed to recover only through pure luck. Unless your spouse has a better job/irreplaceable job, they should move. Family, friends, etc. can all be maintained IF you have a biglaw salary to support your lifestyle. For your OCI bidding, you should only focus on 2-3 markets to maximize your odds in that setting. For mailing/fairs/networking/alumni, it should be anywhere anyone from your school has ever lived before, as well as anywhere you can half-bullshit a reason for wanting to be. For a T-14 (and most T-20s), this is nationwide. In 2010, at the height of the recession, there were still 1,650+ jobs available at firms of 250+ and 4,900 at all firms OUTSIDE of NYC and DC. To avoid applying to any of 250+ or even 100+ lawyer firms because they don't do what you want to do or aren't where you want to live is an easy way to blow your only shot of biglaw.

[dixiecupdrinking]

There are also people who understand they could get a job by applying nationally but would genuinely rather try their luck with public interest/government/small firms/clerkships than go to, say, NYC just for a big salary. Not everyone who does OCI is BigLaw or bust, even in this economy. LRAPs make this kind of decision defensible, though risky. There are definitely a good number of people like this at NYU who did EIW, but always kind of had one foot in the public interest world, and so they were very picky about firm selection and kind of half-committed, and just went back to the public interest track when things didn't work out.

Not to say this is everyone who struck out, by any means. Sorry to hear about your situation, unemployed anon. It's definitely true that high employment numbers can mask the reality that people who would have 5-6 offers five years ago are now just getting 1-2, and at that point a couple of little things going the wrong way for you can really leave you in a bad position.