Georgetown JD Advantage versus LST Score Report Forum

[hashashin]

The salary data on GULC's website for the class of 2012 (http://www.law.georgetown.edu/careers/o ... ry-6-5.pdf) indicates that 314 graduates made between $100,000 and $215,000 in the private sector, meaning that ~50.1 % of the entire class made above six figures in 2012. On the face of it, this is not that far behind Northwestern's own showing of ~56% of its graduates making above 100K.

A large proportion of these relatively good outcomes, however, must have been provided by JD Advantage jobs because there were (according to GULC's data) only 245 graduates who worked for firms that had >100 attorneys, which leaves EXACTLY 69 >=100K jobs unaccounted for.

Do you guys think that it's probable that most of these 69 jobs are from the 69 FT JD Advantage jobs that GULC grads took in 2012?

If so, then I don't see how LawSchoolTransparency can justifiably subtract these out of its score report (and contribute to the impression that these are not good outcomes).

Does anyone have an alternative explanation (i.e. other than number-fudging on GULC's part) for how GULC had an NLJ250 representation of ~31% and yet a little more than HALF of the class managed to earn >100K in the private sector?

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

Mostly it would appear to be the school-funded jobs--61 of them, apparently. I'm presuming GULC counts all of those count as private sector jobs, and if only 18 students made less than $100k in the private sector, than at least 43 of the school-funded jobs would be $100k+, accounting for most of the gap you identified. It either has to be that or there's a lot of six-figure PI going around.

Regardless, not including it in an employment score does not necessarily imply that it's a bad outcome. It's just rightly pointing out that such grads are not really lawyers. If I go make $100k as an accountant after law school, I'm doing okay and I technically have a "JD advantage" job, but law school would've still be a shitty position because it's assuming six-figure debt to use almost none of the skills in such a job--I could have easily been an accountant without going to law school. The term is so broad that I think it's effectively meaningless.

[sinfiery]

The actual report specifies between Public and private sector jobs.

The public sector, sans 18/332 are making 100k+ and doing fairly well. The 18 are from 30-95k with 30 presumably being an extreme and the median lying near the 90k mark (This is 0L wishful thinking, deal with it) (98% reporting as well is reassuring)


The public sector jobs on the otherhand have only 31% reporting salary data and have atrocious salaries relatively speaking to the private sector.

I wish they published the percent of these jobs that qualified for PLSF or a survey of the # of students who graduated 1-3 years ago that are now in PLSF qualifying jobs.


Although 100k is far from enough to service your loans quickly, it is enough to slowly service your loans. Especially sans sticker so that is a big relief.


So my question is, if a job is labeled public sector, how bad can it be...?



As per your LST question, LST is not the end but the beginning of your research. This is the next step and definitely portrays Gtown as better than their LST at a glance profile. The next step of research would be to see exactly what these non biglaw jobs are but that would require, like, personal contact.

[twenty]

than at least 43 of the school-funded jobs would be $100k+

There's no way this is true. School-funded jobs pay barely anything.

Keep in mind that GULC has placed significantly more JD-advantage jobs than most other schools. DC kind of gets a hard-on for JDs for no real reason. Who knows if this is the part-time folks who already hold high-paying government executive spots that need an advanced degree to pad their resumes or if this is a significant number of people that legitimately find great jobs in DC that are only locally-related to law.

[guano]

LST is a rough tool, and while it's fine to get an idea, don't omit critical thinking..

LST must maintain the exact methodology across the board and cannot make exceptions. But their rankings do not account for quality of jobs, so two unemployed grads starting a firm together (JD required) will be ranked higher than, say, a Harvard JD/MBA who ends up going into consulting or Ibanking

Georgetown is a school where JD preferred jobs and non-JD jobs may be legit. As has been stated, DC has plenty of opportunities that do not require bar passage, such as political jobs

[Monochromatic Oeuvre]

than at least 43 of the school-funded jobs would be $100k+

There's no way this is true. School-funded jobs pay barely anything.

Keep in mind that GULC has placed significantly more JD-advantage jobs than most other schools. DC kind of gets a hard-on for JDs for no real reason. Who knows if this is the part-time folks who already hold high-paying government executive spots that need an advanced degree to pad their resumes or if this is a significant number of people that legitimately find great jobs in DC that are only locally-related to law.

Seems you're right. I thought the relatively high incidence of full-time, long-term jobs was an indication that at least some of them were "real jobs", but apparently every other school is counting the throwaway, stat-padding jobs as FT/LT, even as we know grads are getting shown the door after nine months.

I guess that gap therefore must imply there is a significant number of PI students and/or Midlaw students making >$100k.

[you'rethemannowdawg]

than at least 43 of the school-funded jobs would be $100k+

There's no way this is true. School-funded jobs pay barely anything.

Keep in mind that GULC has placed significantly more JD-advantage jobs than most other schools. DC kind of gets a hard-on for JDs for no real reason. Who knows if this is the part-time folks who already hold high-paying government executive spots that need an advanced degree to pad their resumes or if this is a significant number of people that legitimately find great jobs in DC that are only locally-related to law.

This was my guess. It's very possible many of the part-time people already had high 5 figure or 6 figure jobs.

Anecdotally, I've met/heard of a few people in DC who had good gigs at agencies like DOD and got a part-time degree from GULC.

[persona non grata]

DOD jobs and the like should fall under the category of public sector work, no? If you look at the salary stats at the end of the ABA link, you will see that 314 of the 332 2012 GULC grads in the private sector (# working in law firms + # working in business from the ABA report) claim to be making $100,000+. Of these 332 grads, 262 are working in 50+ attorney firms. Even making the admittedly bold assumption that all 262 GULC grads working in 50+ attorney firms make six figures, there are still 52 additional six-figure private sector salaries to be accounted for.

42 grads work for <50-attorney firms and 33 work in business. To corroborate the data GULC provides at the end of the ABA report, 52/75 grads generally assumed to be SOL are making six figures. This seems doubtful, but the numbers do add up:

262 in firms of > 50
42 in firms of < 50
2 for whom firm size is unknown
33 in business
--------------------------------------
339 grads in the private sector
(98% of 339 grads reporting = 332)

Are grads misreporting their salaries? What's the deal?

[hashashin]

There is admittedly some uncertainty about what those 100K jobs remaining; but if slightly more than 50% of the class is making >100k in the private sector (whether this is midlaw, JD Adv, or corporate in-house), AND we take into account that approximately 25% of the class works in the public sector (even if, say, < half of those are desirable), then I'd conjecture that GULC provides approximately 50% + 10% (public sector) = good outcomes for at least 60% of its students.

This appears to be FAR higher than Vanderbilt and UCLA/USC can claim, significantly higher than UT, and VERY close to NW and Cornell. To me, this makes T13 trolling rather untenable.

As a 0L, moreover, I'd like to know estimates of how much of the class of 2013 received 2L SAs at Duke, Cornell and Northwestern from students enrolled there (The official word at GULC was 52% of the class). This would be greatly helpful.

[sinfiery]

The assumption that lawyers who work for a firm with under 50 lawyers are shit out of luck comes from the lack of data on their salaries. Now that we have some data, it is safe to assume that these lawyers from Gtown aren't SOL but are doing well enough to repay their loans (albeit slowly) and maybe even have a better work/life balance than biglawl associates (maybe)

[guano]

This appears to be FAR higher than Vanderbilt and UCLA/USC can claim, significantly higher than UT, and VERY close to NW and Cornell. To me, this makes T13 trolling rather untenable.

Based on cold hard data, there is a noticeable gap between Georgetown and the rest if the T14, but there is also a noticeable gap between Georgetown and the next band (UT/USC/UCLA/Vandy)
The problem is that easy analysis only takes you so far. No one knows whether non-JD jobs are working in consulting, or for Starbucks, whether JD preferred means politics or paralegal.
Simple metrics only take you so far, and the rest is guesswork. It makes sense to assume that non JD jobs from Penn could mean JD/MBAs going to Ibanking or consulting, but how many? All of them? Half? For Georgetown, how many go into political jobs? How many from GW? How many from American?

The assumption that lawyers who work for a firm with under 50 lawyers are shit out of luck comes from the lack of data on their salaries. Now that we have some data, it is safe to assume that these lawyers from Gtown aren't SOL but are doing well enough to repay their loans (albeit slowly) and maybe even have a better work/life balance than biglawl associates (maybe)

part of the problem is that a 50 attorney firm in Tennessee is a completely different beast from a 50 attorney firm in NYC, with the former probably being a desirable outcome (decent salary, reasonable hours) and the latter being a death knell (low salary, high hours - unless it's, say, an IP boutique)

There are many desirable jobs that get counted as a shirty outcome because we've got to draw a live somewhere, and the truth is that the simple division is a good enough proxy. Sure, some desirable outcomes are discounted, but those are in the minority. The inverse is also true, with some very large shitlaw firms, or some low paying, but large sweatshops being counted as a good outcome.

Use some common sense when analyzing the data.

[you'rethemannowdawg]

I suppose there is also the possibility that GULC isn't reporting entirely accurate salary data.

[persona non grata]

When we parse the private sector salary data at the end of GULC's ABA report, we arrive at the conclusion that that 52/75 people working in some business-like capacity or at firms with less than 50 attorneys are making $100,000+ (if one assumes all 262 attorneys working at firms of 50+ are making six figures as well). This would suggest that, whatever these grads are doing, they're being handsomely compensated for their work. Unless Starbucks, etc. is starting barista-to-middle-management program with pay advances, I'm pretty sure these 75 grads are, by and large, doing quite well...

The bottom line is that at least 92% (314/339) of 2012 GULC grads working in the private sector are making six-figure salaries. Of course there is no single clean and easy indicator for what constitutes a positive employment outcome. LST provides multiple quantifiable proxies for good outcomes and I'm simply suggesting that - as far as private sector work is concerned - a $100,000 salary is as good as any other. And, if this data is accurate, Georgetown seems to provide roughly as good of a shot at $100,000 jobs as some other T14s.

There is nothing wrong with concluding that this exercise in common sense indicates the gap between Georgetown and some of the lower T14 is largely a TLS fabrication. Other indicators, like NLJ 250 numbers and hiring at firms of 100+ attorneys, suggest that Georgetown sits firmly above the T15-18 band and firmly below the rest of the T14. This data is interesting in that it's the first I have seen suggesting that Georgetown is truly a lower T14 peer as far as firm hiring is concerned. Of course, there has always been room for speculation regarding self-selection and GULC grads' uniquely strong preference for working in arguably the most competitive legal market in the country.

My question: can we trust this ABA addendum? Is it ABA approved as well, or is GTown trying to pull a fast one here?

[BigLaw_Lit]

Bumping this thread - hoping to hear from current GULCers. I'd much rather be in DC than at Duke, UVA, Cornell, Michigan etc. and the data I've seen here and based on common sense (Gulc has high admission stats) tell me Gtown has similar employment outcomes.

Thoughts from current students?

[tfwnogf]

^I'm in the same position as you. Bump.